Skip to main content

Full text of "Bible vs. tradition : in which the true teaching of the Bible is manifested, the corruptions of theologians detected, and the traditions of men exposed"

See other formats


Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2007 with funding from 

IVIicrosoft Corporation 












J3'ctD-Pork ; 


No. 140 Fulton-street. 



JOHN J. KEED, Printer, 16 Spruce-Stre«t, N. Y. 

P E E F A K 

Our TfTLE wodld seem to Indicate that we liave exposed 
^every case where the " Traditions of men have made void the 
nvord of God.** But not so: this would require volumes. But 
hy attacking eiTor in its strongest hold, we do much to overturn 
^ts whole foundation. And we Tenttire to affirm that he who 
«hall embrace the truths treated of m this book, will be desirous 
<of pursuing the investigation still further. In these pages we 
'have more particularly ^jonfi-ned ourselves to the scriptural 
elucidation of The Mortality of Man, The Unconsciousness of the 
Dead, and the Bestructimi of the Wicked ; but we have likewise 
investigated tiie Nature of Man, The Penalty of the Law, The 
mature of the Sacrifice of ^Christ, Endless Life obtainable only 
tthrough -Christ. The Ref^urrection of the Dead, The nature of 
Hell, The Gospel of the Kingdom and its Location, and Tarious 
other matters that are not :ge«eraHy understood in these days 
of fables. The Immortality of the Soul, and the necessary de- 
parture from the sense of Scriptitre which this belief requires, 
are the basis of all sectarianism and of «11 -creeds. These abaa- 
'doned, and the way is opened to the introduction of a purer 
■Christianity, based solely upon the Word of the Living God. 
3^f we can convince men that God means what he says, and says 
what he means, we shall have opened the door into the Templo 
of Truth ; and may a merciful God induce many to enter thereii^, 
Ithat Ahey may be sanctified thereby. 


As we have been obliged to have recourse to quotatiOBS froio 
the Hebrew and the Greek, and our work is intended for popu- 
lar rea(Eng ^ we desire our readers to remember, that we shall 
use the radical word, in most cases, without those inflections 
intended only to point out a different grammatical construction, 
which woold o»ly embarrass the reader, and cause him to sup^ 
pose that two words were different in their radical meaning, be*- 
cause slightly different in spelling. For the same reason we 
shall often use the singular for the plural. In the Greek worda 
we follow the spelling, not the pronunciation of the wiginal ; 
merely ehangiiag the Greek letters into Englishs and making no» 
distinction between the loi^ and short eand a, and iatroducing 
an h for the Greek asperate ( ^ ), as adri^^ we spell hades. As 
there is considerable variety in the mode of spelling Hebrew 
words in English letters, we shall adopt the mode «sed by Prey- 
fessor Pick, in his Bible Studenfs Chncordamce, excepting iD 
the use of such words, as the readers of Commentaries have be- 
come familiar with ; such words we shall spell in the most com- 
mon manner. As Ruah instead of ruach, or rooakh, spirit ;^ 
Adam for Odom^ man, or man of earth, properly, a man made 
of vegetable mould. '^ There was not an Adam to till the 
adamah;^* Enoiish, for mortal man]^ Anosheem, plural of 
Enoush, mortal men ; chayah. instead of khayoh, living ; chay^ 
for life; chayim, for khayeem, lives; 5^^/, for shemd, thestat^ 
of death; nesme, for breath; nophash, Tiaphash, ni^math, or 
neshomoh, all mean to breathe, expire, and we may sometimes 
comprehend them under the single term, nesme. The plural, 
will generally be expressed by eem, or outhiy added i& the s5ngl^- 
lar, and not im, as in cherab, cherubim. In our quotations, we 
have often reversed the position of the noun, and the adjective ex- 
pressing its quality, makmg the adjective precede the nou». 




I liave read the whole translation and the margin of the 
Old Testament eight times, and the New Testament seven 
times; and have carefully examined every text on the 
■soul, the state of the dead, and the end of the wicked, 
From this examination I am thoroughly convinced that 
the whole man becomes unconscious in death. " In that 
very day his thoughts perish." Ps. 146: 4. "Neither 
have they any more a reward" until the resurrection, 
<Eccl. 9: 5-6; Luke 14: 14,) and "All the wicked will 
<jrod destroy;" yea. He will exterminate both soul and 
body in Grehenna, There is not a single text in the Old 
Testament that will not readily harmonize with these 
views, though there are a few texts in the New Testa- 
ment from which inferences have been too hastily drawn, 
that would seem, to a superficial observer, to oppose these 
views. But where is the doctrine that an incorrect in- 
ference from some obscure text does not appear to con- 
tradict ? But patience and diligence in searching the 
scriptures, and a comparison of scripture with scripture, 
allowing the Bible to be its own dictionary, and its own 
interpreter, (for vain is the help ^f the learned in this 
matter,) and by carefully observing the context and the 
design of the writer, asking wisdom of Him " who giveth 
to all men liberally and upbraideth not," we may discover 


the trutby and if we are willing to receive the truth irr the 
love of it, and are obedient thereunto, we have the pro^ 
mise that we " shall not walk in darkness,, but g^all have 
the light of life," 


I have found much error in our common translation ; the 
margin, which generally contaiBs the tetter reading, con- 
tradicting the text. Adam Clarke says, page 17 of his* 
Commentary, that " The marginal readings are essential 
to ^he integrity of the text ;" " and they are of so much 
importance as to be in several instances preferable to the^ 
textual readings themselves," and they " are to be pre- 
ferred to those in the text in the proportion of at least 
eight to ^ew." It is but too obvious that sectarian prej:u- 
dice has too long prevented the eradication of many 
manifest errors, and that a correct translation, while it 
would completely harmonize with itself, would effectually 
undermine every creed in Christendom. 

It is plain from history, that our first transcribers and 
translators were Romish priests ,r who were interested m 
sustaining the profitable corruptions of the separate exist- 
ence of the soul in purgatory,, and the endless misery of 
the wicked. Every Enghsh translation made prior tc? 
the 18th century, has but too clearly copied from the 
Vulgate, and the translators were not able,, as Macknight 
has fully proved^ to translate the whole Bible from the 
original tongues, and the various editions only profess to 
be compared with the original. King James, who died a 
Papist, gave strict orders to the translators of our com- 
mon version, not to deviate widely from the Bishoph 
Bible, The following directions of the King are copied 
from p. 16 of the preface to Clarke's Commentary :. 

1. " The ordinary Bible read in the church, commonly 
called the Bishop's Bible, to be followed, and as little 
altered as the original will permit. 

4. " When any v/ord hath divers significations, that t<y 
be kept which hath beem most commonly used by the 
most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety o^ 
the place J and the analogy of faith. 


14. " These translations to be used when they agree 
better with the text than the Bishop's Bible, viz. : — Tyn- 
daVs^ Matthew'' s^ Cover dale's^ Whitchurch, Geneva^ 

Dr. Macknight says, that " Tyndale and Coverdale's 
translation, of which the rest are copies, was not made 
from the originals, but from the Vulgate Latin,^'' It is 
evident that our authorized version was not a new trans- 
lation from the Hebrew and Greek ; but only a revision 
of certain editions of the Papal Vulgate. 

To the common version, it is objected, 1. That it often 
dijffers from the Hebrew to follow the Septuagint, and 
the German translation of the Septuagint. 2. That the 
translators following the Latin Vulgate, have adopted 
many of the original words, without translating them, 
such as hallelujah, hosanna, mammon, anathema, &c. 
3. That by keeping too close to the Hebrew and Greek 
idioms, they have rendered the version obscure. 4. That 
they were a little too complaisant to the king, in favoring 
his notions of predestination, election, witchcraft, familiar 
spirits, &c. These, it is probable, were likewise their 
own opinions. 5. That their translation is partial, speak- 
ing the language of, and giving authority to, one sect, 
(meaning, probably, the Episcopahans.) 6. That where 
the original words and phrases admitted of different 
translations, the worse translations, by plurality of voices, 
were put into the text, and the better were often thrown 
out, or put into the margin. 7. That notwithstanding 
all the pains taken in correcting this and the former 
editions of the English Bible, there still remain many 
passages mistranslated, either through negligence or 
want of knowledge ; and to other passages, improper 
additions were made, which pervert the sense. See Pre- 
face to Macknighfs translation of the E2nstle$, pages 21 
to 25. 

The high encomiums passed on the authorized version, 
may be due to the simplicity, elegance, pathos, and 
earnestness of its style; but certainly they do not belong 
to it for its fidelity to the original. On the immortality 
of the soul, the common version is not so faithful to the 
original as is the translation from the Latin Vulgate, 
sanctioned by Bishop Hughes. Drs. Clarke and Scott, 
who speak most highly of our translation, convict it of 
more errors than any other commentators. Be it always 


remembered, that all the transcribers of the manuscripts 
now in existence, and all the translators, previous to King 
James, with perhaps the only exceptions of Tyndal and 
Luther, were believers in the Popish doctrine of the im- 
mortality and separate conscious existence of the human 
soul. There is only one manuscript, marked B., the Cod, 
VaticanuSy No. 1,209, in the hbrary of the Vatican, at 
Rome, that dates back as early as the 4th, though proba- 
bly transcribed in the 5th century. Consequently, all 
the ancient manuscripts were transcribed 200 years after 
the kindred doctrines of the immortahty of the soul, invo 
cation of dead saints, and purgatory, had become estab- 
lished in the Romish church, and the manuscripts being 
scarce, were completely under the control of the Popish 
clergy. The various readings of manuscripts, and differ- 
ing opinions of commentators, prove them to have been 
fallible, and their creeds and traditions would naturally 
bias them in their interpretations of the original text. If 
therefore, we wish to obtain the truth, we are of necessity 
driven to the Hebrew and Greek originals, as the purest 
accessible fountains. 


The following ascertained facts will show the necessity 
for a more thorough revision, or for an entirely new trans- 
lation of the Scriptures, to supplant King James's version. 
The common version at present in use, was printed A.D. 
1611. The only printed editions of the Oreek Testament, 
which were in existence at that time were. Cardinal 
Ximenes, printed in A.D. 1514, Erasmus, 1516, Stephens, 
1546, and Beza, 1563, and editions that were printed from 
these. Nearly the same may be said of the O. T. The 
authorized version was not made from any edition what- 
ever^ uniformly. It is a somewhat startling assertion, 
yet an unquestionable fact, that although we have by 
public authority, a Standard English Version of the Bible^ 
yet there exists NO standard Hebrew and Greek text, 
for the Original of that version ! What is called '^ The 
Received Text,'^ is the text of Erasmus, who revised the 
Latin Vulgate and compared it with the Greek Text. 
This edition was corrected by Stephens, Beza, and Elzivir, 



and was published byElzivir, at Leyden, in Holland, A.D. 
1624 — thatiSj not till thirteen years after the publication 
of the Authorized Version I In the compilation of his 
Text, Erasmus was only able to consult eight recent 
manuscripts, which manuscripts are now considered as 
of comparatively shght authority. These manuscripts 
were those marked 1, 2, 3, 61, and 69; and the MSS. 4 
and 7 were used in part of his text, and only one in Reve- 
lations, all of which were written later than the tenth cen- 
tury. The only manuscript from which he made up his 
Text for Revelations, had several chasms, and because the 
last leaf was wanting, he translated the Latin of the 
Vulgate into Greek I to supply these deficiencies. See 
March's Introduction, vol. ii. p. 846, and Penn's Anno- 
tations. Such is the origin of the Received Text. In 
these times the Reformation had not made sufficient 
progress to allow of the compilation of a correct text. 

The Received Greek Text, though compiled from eight 
comparatively modern manuscripts, is unsupported by 
any one manuscript, ancient or modern, and from recent 
developments, is now acknowledged to be the very worst 
Greek Text extant, in a printed form. Since its publi- 
cation, between 600 and 700 manuscripts have been dis- 
covered, some of which are very ancient, and very 
valuable. The best is marked B, the Cod. Vaticanus, of 
the fourth and fifth centuries. The second, marked A, the 
Cod. Alexandrinus, of the fifth century. The third, 
marked C,' Cod. Ephrem, about the fifth century, and the 
fourth, marked D, Cod. Cantabujiensis, of the seventh 
century. The Received Text has not received the benefits 
of these, nor of the editions and collations of Mill, Wetsteic, 
Matthei, London Polyglott, Bengal, Griesbach, Bently, 
Birch, Knapp, Lachman, Scholz, and Hahn, for the N. 
T., nor of many of the most celebrated collaters of the 
O. T. 

The first translation of the Bible into English, was 
made by Wickliffe, wholly from the Latin Vulgate, in 
A.D. 1380. This forms the basis of all the Enghsh 
editions. Tyndale pubhshed his first edition in 1525. 
Between this and the version of King James, in 1611, a 
period of only eighty-six years, four successive revisions 
were published by authority, as new stores of manuscripts 
w^ere discovered ; that is, one version was made on an 


average, every twenty -two years. Although in the 241 
years since King James's revision was made, a greater 
multitude of manuscripts, of greater value and authority 
than any before known, have been discovered and col- 
lated, yet no subsequent revision has been made by autho- 
rity. Still many will fondly cling to the common version, 
wdth all its errors and corruptions, and thereby help to 
conceal the precious truths which the providence of God 
has brought to light, and placed within the reach of the 
learned ; but which are shamefully withheld from the 

We are aware that sectarianism would suiSer consider- 
ably from a correct translation. But what of that ? 
The gain to the cause of truth and righteousness would 
gloriously compensate. Indeed it may be set down as 
an axiom, that when the Scriptures are purposely cor- 
rupted to sustain any doctrine, that doctrine is presump- 
tively false. No lover of truth tries to conceal her from 
himself The " Bible Union" have convicted our trans- 
lation of twenty tlwusand errors ! some indeed of small 
consequence. But the Scriptures have been purposely 
corrupted^ to sustain the doctrines of the •' immortality of 
the soul," " the separate conscious existence of the spirit 
of man," " the eternal misery of the wicked," &c., as we 
shall make abundantly manifest in the forthcoming pages. 
Sometimes whole stories have been introduced, probably, 
in the opinion of the transcribers, to embellish. Such 
are, — The woman taken in adultery; The descent of the 
angel to trouble the waters of Bethesda ; The bloody 
sweat of our Saviour, and the angel strengthening him ; 
and The conversion of the dying thief upon the cross ; 
all of which are supposed to be spurious. But, perhaps, 
the worst of all these corruptions, is the transposition 
and omission of clauses of the verses in Mat. chap. 27, to 
conceal the essential fact, that Christ was truly slain by 
his enemies. The reading of the best manuscripts is, 
50 V. : " They offered him vinegar : but another going to 
him, pierced his side with a spear ; and Jesus crying with 
a loud voice, expired." This passage of the piercing of 
Christ, j^Wor to his deaths was condemned, as late as the 
fourteenth century^ by Popes Clement V.^ and his suc- 
cessor, John, because it conflicted with some of their 
potions respecting the Trinity. This shameful perversion 


is sufficient alone to condema every edition in which 
it is contained. 

Seemingly the best course now to be pursued, would 
be to ad-opt the principle of criticism recommended by 
Dr. Johnson, " For restoring the correct text of all an- 
cient writings^ whether profane or sacred^ " Take the 
w^ost ancient copy for the standard \ to correct by autho- 
rity, wherever it can be found ; and to resort to conjec- 
ture, only where authority is absolutely and altogether 
wanting ; observing always to bold a most rigid medium 
between presumption and timidity, by the former of 
which, we induce error upon truth, and by the latter, we 
eonsent to remain forever und^ the dominion of error, 
and in the power of chance, ignorance, or artifice," 

This is the principle that has been adopted by Penn, 
in his revision of" The New Covenant" He has chosen 
the entire text of the most ancient surviving manuscript, 
and which is likewise the most free from those interhnea- 
tions and alterations, that disfigure and render suspicious, 
other manuscripts : This one is the Codex VaticanuSj or 
celebrated Vatican MS. noted 1209 in the Vatican cata- 
logue at Rome, and marked B, by Wetstein, making it 
the basis and substsaice of his revision. a ^^ 


Assisted by an honest and learned friend of the Inde- 
pendent Congregational Society, we have traced all the 
original terms translated mul^ spirit^ life^ breathy hell^ 
grave^ and others, throughout the whole Bible, so that 
any person may readily perceive their Bible definitions. 

The Hebrew word, nephesh^ of the Old Testament, 
occurs about seven hundred times, and is rendered sovl 
four hundred and seventy-one times ; life and living^ 
about one hundred and fifty times ; and the same word 
is also rendered a man^ a person^ self they^ me^ him^ any 
one^ breathy hearty mind^ appetite^ the body (dead or alive,) 
lust^ creature^ and even a beast ; for it is twenty-eight 
times applied to beasts^ and to every creeping thing. 

The Greek word psitche^ of the New Testament, cor- 
responds with the word nephesh of the Old. It occurs 
ono hundred and five times, and is rendered sgid fifty-nino 


times, and life forty times. The same word is also ren- 
dered mind^ tiSy you., hearty heartily^ and is twice applied 
to the beasts that perish. PsuchikoSy an adjective derived 
from psuche^ occurs six times, and is translated natural 
and sensual ; it is properly translated animal in modern 
translations. 1 Cor. 1 5 : 44, will bear this translation. It 
is sown soma psuchikon^ a 50i^/-body, or an animaZ-body, 
it is raised a spiritual body. There is soma psuchikon^ a 
sow/-body, or animal-hodjy and there is a spiritual body. 
45th ver. And so it is written, (Gen. 2. 7,) The first 
man, Adam, was made into psuchen zosan, a living souly 
the last Adam into a life-giving spirit. 46th ver. How* 
beit the spiritual ivas not the first thing , but iYiQ psuchikon^ 
animal^ or 502^^-man, and afterwards the spiritual man. 
Thus we see that the adjective joswc^zX'o/z always indicates 
mortality and corruption, and designates the animal na- 
ture, or soul nature of man, in contradistinction to the 
spiritual nature, or incorruptible nature, which the 
Christian will receive at the period of his resurrection 
from the dead. 

The word ruah, in Hebrew, corresponds with pneuma 
in the Greek. These words are mostly rendered spirit ; 
but are likewise rendered wind^ air^ breathy life^ mindj 
disposition^ &c., and are sometimes applied to the beasts. 
But it cannot be proved that either of the terms mean 
a ghost^ or abstract conscious spirit, in either man or 

If any theologian, fearing that the craft is in danger, 
by which he obtains his wealth, should venture to deny 
the truth manifested in these pages, he must likewise 
deny the truth of the Bible. And to defeat this work 
by arguments drawn from the Bible, he would be required 
to produce as many pointed texts opposed to our views, 
as we have produced ; and likewise to show that the 
thousands of texts here produced are to be interpreted as 
contrary to their plain and obvious import, as the dead 
body of man is contrary to the immortal soul or ghost of 
a man ; for the words w.eth nephesh^ dead soul, occur 
eleven times, and are four times translated dead body^ 
although twice the word soul is put into the margin, 
(Numb. 19: 11 ; 6: 6,) but in the other places no intima- 
tion is given that the original words meth nephesh, dead 
souls, is improperly rendered. We give a few examples, 


Numb. xix. 16. And whosoever toucheth one that is 
slain with the sword in the open field, or a meth nephesh^ 
dead soul^ or a bone of a nepheshy soul, or a grave, shall 
be unclean seven days. 2 Ohron. 20: 24. Behold, they 
were meth nephesh, dead souls, fallen to the earth. 25th 
ver. They found among them in abundance both riches, 
with the meth nephesh, dead souls, and precious jewels. 
Ps. 79: 2. The meth nephesh, dead souls, of thy ser- 
vants have they given to be meat unto the fowls of the 
heavens. See also, Ps. 110: 6 ; Lev. 21: 11 ; Numb. 6: 
6; 9: 10; 19: 16; Hag. 2. 13. 

Thus, then, the fabled immortal souls have bones, and 
are slain with the sword. These plain texts must not be 
set aside by incorrect inferences drawn from a few texts 
which have been forced into the service of our opponents. 
Let us have scripture argument, for we shall treat human 
wisdom and invention as unworthy of notice. Al- 
though, in this discussion, w^e shall now and then be 
compelled to use plain and severe language to dishonest 
priests, who will neither acknowledge the truth, nor per- 
mit others to judge for themselves ; yet we do not design 
to treat unkindly the honest and the hberal, and especially 
do we desire to avoid anything that has the slightest 
tendency to deter the sincere inquirers after truth. 

In the forth-coming pages we shall unfold the truths of 
the Bible, relating to the nature and destiny of man, 
expose the pious frauds and forgeries of theologians, and 
manifest their numerous and glaring absurdities. And, 
First, we shall prove from the Bible, the corporeal being 
and mortality of the soul, and the nature of the spirit of 
man ; which spirit, not being a living entity, is neither 
mortal nor immortal. And, Second, we shall prove that 
the hell of the Bible imports the utter extermination of 
the wicked cast therein, the deprivation of their life and 




" I will not contend forever, neither will I be always 
wroth : for the spirit should fail before me, and the souls 
which I have made." Isa. 57: 16. 

In tracing the word soul through the authorized ver- 
sion of the Bible, we find it occurs five hundred and 
thirty two times — four hundred and seventy-six times in 
the Old Testament, and fifty-six times in the New. God 
is represented as having a soul sixteen times. " Your 
new moons and appointed feasts my soul hateth." Isa. 1 : 
14 ; Lev. 26: 11, 30 ; Judges 10 : 16 : Job 23 : 13 ; Ps. 
11: 5; Isa. 42: 1 ; Jer. 5^:9, 29; 6: 8; 9:9; 12: 7; 
14; 19; 32 : 41 ; Zech. 11 : 8; and Heb. 10: 38. 

The word soul occurs five times in King James's ver- 
sion of the Old Testament, where nephesh is not the 
original term ; for the word nedivothee^ which the margin 
calls darling J is rendered soul in Job 30 : 15 : it probably 
means munificence ; and in 2 Saml. 13 : 39, and Ps. 16 : 
2, the word soul is added by the translators, there being 
no corresponding word in the Hebrew Text. 

The word neshomoh^ or nesme^ is once rendered soul^ 
in Isa. 57 : 16, the text we have chosen for our motto. 
Taylor, in his Hebrew Concordance, says, that *' neshomohj 
or nesme, signifies the chameleon, a kind of lizard, which 
has its mouth always open, gaping for the air, on which 
it was once supposed to live. Nesme is rendered breathy 
spirit J and life^ 


It is rendered breath and spirit in the following texts, 
and expresses the idea of natural life^ whether in man 
or beast. Gen.2: 7; 7i22; Deut.20: 16; Jos. 11: 11, 
14; 1 Kings 15: 23; 17:17; Ps. 150 : 6 ; Isa. 2 : 22 ; 
42 : 5. 

But nesme cannot ever mean an abstract intelligence, 
or soul, or spirit ; for it would be absurd to translate 
Josh. 11 : 11, There was not any (nephesh) soul^ left to 
(nesme, to soul, instead of to) breathe. Here nesme un- 
doubtedly means breathe, and is so rendered. And in 
every other place where it occurs, it either means breath, 
or a breather, or life sustained by means of breathing the 
breath of lives ; that is, it signifies the chameleon or any 
other creature that lives by breathing. Our motto, then, 
should be understood thus, " lest the (ruah) spirit, or 
living creature, should fail before me, and the nesme, 
breather, that I have made." And so in Ps. 150:6; 
" Let every nesme, breather, praise the Lord." We 
conclude, therefore, that nesme nowhere means soul inde- 
pendently of our bodily organization. 

Nephesh is rendered soul four hundred and fifty-four 
times ; and psuche is so rendered fifty-seven times, mak- 
ing five hundred and eleven times that nephesh and 
psuche are rendered soul, when applied to man ; and 
seventeen times in the original we find these terms applied 
to beasts. There are more than three hundred other 
places where the same terms are rendered life, person, or 
body, &c. ; for, had they been rendered soul in all such 
places, then the reader must have perceived that the 
word soul never could mean a something that could Uve 
separately from the man himself, neither as an " immortal 
soul,'''' or " deathless spirit." Parkhurst says, that 
" nejihesh, as a noun, hath been supposed to signify the 
spiritual part of man, or what we commonly call his soul. 
I must confess," says he, " that I can find no passage 
where it hath undoubtedly this meaning." 

We say the true meaning of soul is, a creature that 
lives by breathing ; and as the essential endowment of 
such a creature is life, so life will stand often as a correct 
meaning of soul. When soul is applied to man, it may 
be translated life, soul, man, you, yourself, person, my- 
self, thyself, &c., according to the text. 

But some of our translators, more honest than the rest, 


have ventured, in a number of these places, to insert th<? 
true word, soul, in the margin ; but none of them were 
honest enough to give us the word soul in every place 
where nephesh and j^952/cAe occur. We shall endeavor to 
supply their deficiency. 

In pursuing this subject we shall give the Bible answer 
to the following questions : — 

1. Is the soul as great as theologians assume it to be? 

2. What is a soul ? 

3. Is the soul immortal so that it cannot fail^ or cease 
to exist as a living being befm-e God ? 

4. What is a spirit ? 

5. Is the spirit immortal , so that it cannot cease to ani- 
mate the man ? 

6. We shall slww that every text in the Bible will harmo- 
nize with our answers ; even the very texts from which a 
contrary inference has been erroneously drawn. 

Our motto most certainly imphelj, that if God were to 
contend forever, or to be always wroth, that the spirits 
and souls of men w^ould fail, die, or cease to exist as living 
beings before him. But waiving this, we proceed to an- 
swer the j&rst question : 


To this question we give an unquaiified negative. For, 
1st. The ward soul when applied to man, does not mean 
a ghost or independent entity. Because man and beast 
would in this respect be on a level with God. For if a 
man's soul is a ghost, or spirit, because the soul of God 
is a ghost or spirit, as Luther Lee argues, then we say 
that a beast's soul is a ghost also. Now, allowing beasts 
to possess souls, as Mr. Lee admits^ then upon this rea- 
soning, surely all are up to a level with God, as all have 
souls : " For in his hand is the soul of every living crea- 
ture, and the breath of all mankind." Job 12 : 10, 

Again, if a man's soul is a ghost, because it goes by the 
same name as the soul of God, then, not only beasts and 
every creeping thing being souls, are ghosts ; and then, 
too, the soul of sheol (the grave, or death,) is likewise a 
ghost, because it goes by the same name, Isa. 5 : 14, 
" Therefore sheol, (the state of death, or grave,) hath en- 
larged her nephesh, (soul or being,) and opened her mouth 


without measure." The same reasoning would show that 
man himself, as existing in this hfe, is a ghosty for God is 
called a man, Exo. 15 : 3, " The Lord is a man of war." 
The same principle of false reasoning would convert a 
man's heart and eyes, as well as the heart and eyes of 
beasts into so many ghosts, for they are called by the 
same name as the eyes and heart, hands, and feet of God. 
And a tree must have sense and feeling, because it is said 
to have life as well as men. But what sort of theology 
is this ? Cannot God possess an attribute that may be 
entirely spiritual, yet called by the same name as one in 
man that may be entirely corporeal ? If he cannot, then 
how shall he be able, out of these stones, to raise up 
children unto Abraham ? Matt. 3 : 9. Surely the souls 
of these children would be corporeal, if made out of stones. 

Again, God's sotfl cannot be separated from himself; 
for if it can, then is he two Gods, " But to us there is 
but one God." I Cor. 8 : 6. Allow God's soul to be /iim- 
self as nephesh when applied to God, is twice translated. 
Jer. 51 : 14, •"' The Lord of hosts hath sworn by his ne- 
pheshj^^ (by himself). Also in Amos 6:8; or him, as in 
Pro. 6 : 16. " These six things doth the Lord hate, yea, 
seven are an abomination of his (nephesh^) of him ;" and 
we obtain the correct idea. As nephesh^ the soul, com- 
prehends the whole being of God, so does the same term 
comprehend the whole being of man ; and never means a 
principle that can live independently of the man or beast, 
to both of which the term nephesh is indiscriminately ap- 
plied ; and is twenty -five times correctly translated " them- 
selves." Let two examples suffice for the present. " He 
teareth (his nephesh) himself in his anger." Job 18:4. Did 
Job tear his immaterial and immortal ghost ? '' Back- 
sliding Israel hath justified herself, (her nephesh) more 
than treacherous Judah." Jer. 3:11. Has a nation a 
ghost ? 

Nay, but every nation has a being. Here, then, the 
arguments of Luther Lee, and those of like ("^^receows.?") 
faith, are overthrown by the translators themselves, though 
they were believers in the immortal-soul theory. It is 
vain to endeavor to array the soul, which is the man him- 
self, with the attributes of independent conscious existence, 
spirituality, immateriality, and immortality, against the 
plainest declarations of God's Word. 


2dly. The soul of man is no part of God, Because if 
every soul is a part of God, or of the essence of 
Deity, as some theologians contend, then God is not one 
and indivisible, but is a multitude, and these multiplied 
millions of parts sin and die. " For the soul that sinneth 
IT shall die." And if so many parts of God sin, then 
these sinning parts are opposed to the other parts of him ; 
and thus this absurd theory divides God against himself; 
" How then shall his kingdom stand ?" 

Again, as the soul is sometimes unhappy, it would fol- 
low upon this theory, that God is sometimes unhappy. 
And if the dogma of the endless misery of the wicked 
were true, then millions of parts of God would be tormen- 
ted for ever ; and, as some theologians represent, these 
souls of the wicked, as parts of God, will be eternally 
cursing the other parts of God ! ! ! unless these wicked 
shall c«ase to become parts of God. But if so many parts 
of God can be annihilated, or converted into that which 
is not a part of God, then when God swore by himself — 
" As I live," the stability of his oath is overturned, be- 
cause if one part of God may die, all may die ! ! Into 
such absurdities does this vain philosophy lead its profes- 

Again, it is presumed that all will admit, that God, and 
all that constitutes his being, is uncreated^ for he did not 
create himself, and there was none before him to create. 
If any part of God was created, then that part had a be- 
ginning, and is not eternal. But man, soul and spirit, 
was created, " as the Lord liveth that made us this soul." 
Jer. 38: 16. '^ Lo, he that formeth the mountains and 
createth the spirit" {ruah). Am. 4: 13. ''The Lord 
which formeth the spirit {ruah) of man that is in him." 
Zech. 12 : 1. The last two examples, refer to the ruah^ 
as the principle of life. As soul and spirit were created 
and had a beginning, therefore they are not parts of an 
uncreated and eternal God. 

Again, the soul is not only created, but created of the 
dust ; for the same man that is called a living soul was 
made of the dust of the ground : " And God said, dust 
thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Gen. 3:19. 
And Paul says, that the same living soul is of the earth, 
earthy. 1 Cor. 15:47. Words cannot make it more plain 
than do these texts, that the whole man is a soul, and is 


corporeal. But should any contend that the name " man," 
does not include the 80ul, and insist that the soul was a 
eoraething added to man, by the breath that was breathed 
into his nostrils, then man w only a body, and his body 
became a living soul. And this is true, for the creature, 
man, or body, or soul, that was made of the dust of the 
earth, and was hfeless, by the simple inspiration of the 
breath of lives, that is, of all lives, became a living soul. 
For the lifeless soul made of dust, became a living soul or 
creature. See Job's account of this matter, 10: 8-12, 
how God made him or his soul. 

8. " Thy hands have bound me, (or my soul,) and 
formed me altogether, joining me together on every side, 
thou didst also finish me. 

9. Eemember, I beseech thee, as clay didst thou form 
me ; and wilt thou return me to dust ? 

10. AVas it not as milk thou pourest me out, and as a 
cheese concreted me together ? 

11. With skin and flesh thou didst clothe me, and in- 
terwoven me with bones and sinews, 

1 2. Life and sensation thou didst produce in me, and 
thy superintending care hath preserved my breath:'*'* — 

Here the same *' /we^," that is clothed with flesh and 
skin, and platted together with bones and sinews, and re- 
ceives life and the conscious faculty from the Lord, is the 
same " wc," that was moulded as the clay, and must be 
brought into dust again. Life and sensation are here 
made to depend upon the pi-eservation of his breath, and 
to preserve his breath is equivalent to the preservation of 
his life and consciousness. So Dan. 5:13," God in whose 
hand thy breath is, and whose are all thy ways ;" and 
Paul, Acts 17 : 28, " In him we live, and move, and have 
our being." For " No man hath power to retain the 
spirit" of the breath of lives. " Man does not live by 
bread alone;" and, if " God gather unto himself his spirit 
and his breath," then ^'' man shall turn again unto dust;" 
and "his thoughts perish." Job 34: 14, 15; and Psal. 
146 : 4. So in Job 30 : 23. " For I know that thou wilt 
bring me to death, and to the house appointed for all the 
living." Job says that " me," (himself,) should be brought 
to the sepulchre. If the soul does not enter there, then 
the soul does not live, or the house is not appointed for 


nil the living. In the first version of the Scriptures, the 
8yriac, the sepulchre is called the " home of the dead." 
Theologians tell us that it is the soul that seeks God, and 
that follows after righteousness. Very well. Read then 
Isa. 51 : 1, 2. '^Hearken to me, ye that follow after 
righteousness, ye that seek the Lord ; look unto the rock 
whence ye are hewn^ and to the hole of the pit whence 
ye fire digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and 
unto Sarah that bare you." The holiest part of the Chris- 
tian then proceeds from the earth, and is bom of earthly 
parents. Abraham sets his seal to this truth, for he says, 
Gen. 18: 27, ''I am but dust and ashes." If Abraham 
w^as an immortal soul, with the exception of a thin, out- 
side shell — the body, how could he say that he was but 
dust and ashes ; nay, he could not have said that he was 
an immortal ghost, while any part of him was dust. Ps. 
78 : 39, (God) '' remembered that they were but^es^; a 
wind that passeth away." But if a part of man was a 
ghost or spirit, would not God have remembered that 
they were but part flesh, and that the principal part of 
them was an immortal ghost ? But all of man and of 
beast are of the dust, and all shall alike turn to dust 
again. The very highest nature that man has, irrespec- 
tive of Christ and the resurrection, is flesh, an evanescent 

Again, theologians tell us, that the soul is the essential 
part of man. We say, it is the man himself They say, 
it was created separately from the body. If so, why did 
not Moses, in recording the history of the creation of 
man, give us some account of this matter ? And why 
did he exhaust his description, by giving us an account 
of the formation of the body ? and why call this body 
the man, even before the Hving principle, which they 
term the great '* immortal soul," was imparted ? Why 
use a phraseology that precludes the idea that any such 
soul was given ? Will our current teachers please in- 
form us ? 

Again : If souls are a part of God, or if they are ira 
material spirits, then they are not begotten by their 
fathers, but are separately originated. But yet the Bible 
fourteen times expressly declares, that " souls came out 
of the loins of their fathers," and " that they were born 
of their fathers in the land ;" not in heaven. Gen. 12: 5, 


" And Abraham took Sarah his wife, and Lot, his bro- 
ther's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, 
and the souls that they had gotten in Haran^ and they 
went forth to go into the land of Canaan." That " souls 
were born in their father's house." Exodus 12: 19, and 
Numb. 15: 30. In Gen. 46: 18, "These are sons of 
Zilpah, and these she bare unto Jacob^ even sixteen souls^ 
Verse 26, " All the sotds that came with Jacob into 
Egypt, which came out of his loins.'''* Exo. 1:5, " All 
the souls that came out of the loins ofJacob^ were seventy 
souls." See also. Gen. 46: 15, 22, 25, 27- Now I ask, 
did Abraham, Lot, and Jacob, beget these souls ? or, if 
those seventy " immortal souls" came down from heaven, 
how came they in Jacob's loins ? Say, rather, that Adam 
was created with a pro-creative faculty, and as God 
caused the " earth to bring forth grass and herb yielding 
seed after his kind^ and the tree yielding fruit whose seed 
was in itself after his kind," so man was made with the 
power to produce his Hke. Could these seventy souls 
that came out of the loins of mortal Jacob, be immortal 
ghosts ? For how can flesh beget spirit ? For " that 
which is born of the flesh is flesh," and not spirit, there- 
fore to possess that spiritual, incorruptible, immortal na- 
ture, the peculiar privilege of the righteous ; " Ye must 
be born again," of the Spirit, and by a resurrection from 
the dead, or ye cannot inherit an everlasting kingdom. 

Again : the soul is not a spirit ; for soul and spirit are 
separate things. 1 Thes. 5 : 23, " I pray God your 
whole spirit, and soul, and body, (or your whole person,) 
be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord 
Jesus Christ." This cannot mean that man has two 
ghosts. Perhaps it may mean your whole disposition, 
life, and person, the whole compound nature of man, for 
spirit sometimes means person. Heb. 4 : 12, " The Word 
of God, as a sharp two-edged sword, dividing asunder soul 
and spirit ;" separating the soul-like or animal nature of 
man, from his higher intellectual and moral qualities. 
See also Isa. 57 : 16; Luke 1 : 46, 47. 1 Cor. 6 : 20, 
" Glorify God in your body." All the MSS. close the 
paragraph here. The clause, " and in your spirits which 
are his," is undoubtedly spurious. And 1 Thes. 5 : 23, 
may also have been a little amended by some ofl&cious 


The word pstichikos^ an adjective, derived from pstiche^ 
a soul, occurs six times. Strictly rendered, it would be 
soulical, or soul-like, or animal ; and is kindred to what 
Paul designates the flesh, or animal nature of man, in op- 
position to the spiritual, or higher moral and intellectual 
nature ; as in Rom. 8 : 5, " Now they who live according 
to the flesh, mind the things of the flesh, and they who 
live according to the spirit, attend to the things of the 
spirit. For the thinking of the flesh is (or produces) 
death, and the thinking of the spirit is (or produces) life 
and peace.^' Here are two thinking principles contrasted 
with each other — the animal or soul-like principle, called 
flesh, producing, if allowed to predominate, death ; and 
the reasonable, intellectual, and moral principle, called, 
spirit, producing, if controlling, life and peace. 

In 1 Cor. 2 : 14, and 15 : 44, 46, psztchikos^ soul-like, 
soulical, or animal, is translated natural ; but in Jude 19, 
and in James 3 : 15, it is rendered sensual. In all these 
places the soulical nature is put in direct and strong op- 
position to the spiritual nature. And the spiritual nature, 
be it remembered, does not naturally belong to man, but 
is superinduced as a subsequent and peculiar develop- 
ment in the cases of those who have submitted themselves 
to Christ. Of those under the control of the soulical na- 
ture, Jude, verse 19, says, *' These be they who separate 
themselves {psuchiJcos), soulical men, or animal men, not 
having the Spirit ^ And James 3 : 15, " This is not the 
wisdom which cometh from above, but is earthly, {psu- 
chiJcos,) soulical, or animal, devilish." Paul says of such, 
1 Cor. 2: 14, " Now, (psu^hikos,) a soulical, or animal 
man, receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for 
they are foolishness to him ; neither can he know them, 
because they are (pneumatikos) spiritually examined;" 
that is, they are intellectually and morally examined 
So much for the soul-ghost invention ! Theologians tell 
us that the soul is a spirit or ghost, that receives and 
transacts all spiritual matters. Yet Christ says, " If a 
man hate not his own (psucke,) soul, he cannot be my 
disciple." Luke 14:26. All agreeing with Paul's well- 
known expression, " To be carnally-minded is death." 

The mere possession of a soul nature, then, so far from 
implying superiority, is conspicuously marked as the 
lowest animal nature, incapacitating those who possess 


nothing more, from receiving or appreciating the higher 
intellectual and moral communications and endowments. 
Therefore, says Paul, 1 Cor. 3:1, " Now I, brethren, 
could not speak to you as to spiritual (men), but as to 
Heshly men, even as to babes in Christ." As unto men 
governed by your soulical or animal natures, and not by 
your intellectual and moral. Nearly the whole of Paul's 
reasoning, through 1 Cor. 15, is to show that the soul 
nature which we now possess, even with the accompani- 
ments of spiritual graces, altogether unfits us for inherit- 
ing an everlasting kingdom, and is likewise emphatically 
incompatible with the separate existence of either soul or 
spirit; for he affirms, 16 and 18, " If the dead are not 

raised Certainly also those who have fallen asleep 

in Christ have perished." That their hope has ended 
with the life they have lost. They are utterly blotted 
out of existence for the present and all future time ; for, 
he argues, " If there be no resurrection from the dead," 
the dead in Christ Hve not now, nor will they live in the 
future. If there be no resurrection, there is no future 
life, even for Christians, after this. He proceeds strongly 
to contrast the soulical nature of the first Adam and his 
descendants, with the spiritual nature which the second 
Adam possesses, subsequent to his resurrection, and the 
spiritual nature which his disciples will possess, who will 
live again through him, subsequent to their resurrection. 

The whole nature derived from the first Adam, he 
affirms to be corruptible, mortal, (psuchikos^) soulical, or 
animal and earthy. But the nature to be possessed 
afterwards, by the righteous, at the resurrection, he con- 
trasts with this, and affirms of that nature, that it will be 
incorruptible, immortal, {pneumatikon,) spirit-like, or 
spiritual and heavenly. 

It seems there were some in Paul's days, who denied 
the resurrection of the dead, the fundamental doctrine of 
Christianity, which rendered the sufferings of Christ, his 
death and resurrection of no avail, and the sufferings of 
his followers were likewise useless ; their faith was vain, 
their hope was vain. They had predicated all upon a 
resurrection from the dead, and the rewards and the 
glory to be then revealed, and these doubters denied 
that it would ever take place. But, alas ! this same 
doctrine is practically and absolutely denied, by all who 


believe in the immortality of the soul ! For if the soul, 
or essential man, does not die, as modern theology affirms, 
how can it be raised again to hfe ? Paul's language to 
one of these would be, 36th ver. " Foolish man ! The 
seed which thou sowest, is not ?'e-enlivened, unless it die?'* 
We will paraphrase his words from the 44th verse. 

The soma 'psuchikon^ soulical body, or present animal, 
or soul nature of the Christian is consigned to the grave ; 
but he will be raised again, soma pneumatikon^ a spiritual 
body, a real, tangible, yet heavenly nature, of which 
Jesus Christ is the first-fruits, being the first who has 
manifested this life, and incorruptibility promised in the 
Gospel, by rising again from the dead, with a nature 
that cannot now^ be subject to corruption. This is the 
pattern after which we shall be fashioned. Thus hath 
Christ made death ineffectual to his followers, and hath 
ill rated that life and incorruptibility that he requires 
us . seek for. (2 Tim. 1 : 10 ; Rom. 2: 7.) For there 
is not only a soma psuchikon, a soulical nature, which 
we at present possess, but there will Hkewise be a soma 
pneumatikon^ a spiritual nature, with which Christians 
shall be invested at the resurrection. And so also it is 
written in Genesis 2 : 7, The first man Adam was only 
made a psuchen zosan, a living animal, or a living soul, 
or a living creature, for the terms are synonimous, and 
therefore had nothing about him but what was mortal 
and corruptible ; but the second Adam was made into a 
pneuma zdopoioun, a life-giving spirit, who will again im- 
part life unto his followers, by a resurrection from the 
dead, connected with an incorruptible or spiritual nature, 
not subject to death. 46th verse. But we do not pos- 
sess this pneu?natikon, spiritual nature, " at first," or in 
this present state, but only that which is psuchikon^ 
soulical, or animal, and " afterwards," when Christians 
are raised from the dead, we shall put on for the first 
time, our pneumatikon^ spiritual nature. The first man 
was wholly made of the dust of the earth, and must, 
therefore, be of an earthly nature, unfitted for eternal 
fife, and hence the necessity for the tree of lives being 
placed within his reach, that if he maintained his inno- 
cence, he might have eaten of it and hved for ever ; but 
the second man, the pattern of the nature we Christians 
are to possess, is the Lord from heaven. 48th verse. A3 

PARAPHRASE QV 1 COR. 15: 44-M. 25 

the first man from whom we have descended, was made 
of dust, so we possess no other nature from the first 
Adam, but an earthly nature, and those that do not be- 
Jieve and obey Christ, will possess no other nature, and 
even if they should be raised from the dead, not having 
the germ of the spirit of Christ, they would not possess 
this spiritual or incorruptible nature, and would there- 
fore naturally die again, without any positive infliction of 
the judgments of God ; as did the widow's son, the 
nobleman's daughter, and Lazarus, who were only 
restored to Adamic, or mortal life. But as the second 
Adam, or the second great head of all who will continue 
to live, was from heaven, we Christians, who possess his 
likeness, a heavenly, incorruptible, and therefore an im- 
mortal nature at the resurrection, when Christ, who is 
our life, shall appear. Verse 49. And, as Christians 
have borne the likeness of the earthly and mortal Arlam, 
60, at the resurrection, shall Christians bear the lil '/ess 
of the heavenly man, Christ Jesus. Verse 53. For this 
corruptible, decaying nature, which w^e now possess, and 
which necessarily unfits us for an everlasting inheritance, 
must put on a something we do not at present possess ; 
that is, an incorruptible body — we must put on immor- 
tality. Verse 54. When this mortal nature shall have put 
on immortality, the7t, and not till then, will death be swal- 
lowed up in victory. The dominion of Death over the 
whole being of the righteous is complete ; they sleep in 
unconsciousness till the resurrection. But the '' gates 
of hades," the power of death and the grave, will not 
continue to prevail over the church. For when Christ, 
who is our life, shall appear, then also will his followers 
appear with him in glory, and the dominion of death 
over the righteous will then ce^se forever. See also ver. 
17, 18, 19, 29, 30, and 32. 

We have merely amplified the arguments of the 
Apostle. The immortal nature to be derived from 
Chi'ist, is strongly contrasted with the mortal nature 
derived from Adam. But if all men possessed this im- 
mortal nature through natural birth, then there is no 
contrast, and the Apostle's strong argument is converted 
into nonsense ! The Apostle's argument is plain enough 
as it stands, without our paraphrase, to convince all 
candid persons that man, in his present state, is not 


immortal ; nay, that there is no principle of immortality, 
or perpetual conscious existence naturally, inherent in 
him. Can a soul that is now immortal put on, for the 
first time, at a future period, immortality ? Paul says, 
1 Tim. 6 : 16, I' God only hath immortality," and, conse- 
quently, no other being but God is naturally immortal. 

The word apsuchoSy without a soul, that is something 
not intended to live by breathing, occurs once, in I Cor. 
14:7, translated without life, " things without life, giv- 
ing sound." The w^ord soul is likewise applied thirty 
times to beasts, creeping things, and fish. 

We therefore conclude, that the soul and spirit are 
not identical, but two things — as much so as body and 
breath are two things ; and that the soul of man is not 
what modern philosophy assumes it to be, but is the 
man himself, a mere mortal creature. 


We now quote a few Scriptures to prove that the 
man, or his body, actuates the soul, which could never 
occur if the soul were an independent ghost, and the 
body only one of many modes by which the soul could 
manifest hfe. Deut. 4:9, " Only take heed to thyself, 
and keep thy soul diligently. Beut. 24 : 15, " For he is 
poor, and Ufteth his {nephesh) soul unto it." Jer. 44 : 
14, " That they should return into the land of Judab, to 
which they hft up their (nephesh) soul." Ez. 24 : 25, 
" The desire of their eyes, the lifting up of their [nephesh) 
soul." Hosea ,4 : 8, " They lift up their (nephesh) soul 
to their iniquity." In these places, nephesh is rendered 
heart, desire, or mind. It is the man that lifts up or 
controls the nephesh, or soul, and the soul does not con- 
trol the man. In Ps. 24 : 4 ; 25 : 1 ; 86 : 4 ; 143 : 8, 
David lifts up his soul to God. But he presented not 
his ghost, but himself, to God, to be protected and 
blessed. In Daniel 5 : 23, " But hast lifted up thyself 
against the Lord of heaven." Ezek. 31 : 10, " Because 
thou hast lifted up thyself in height." Here, and in 
many other places, thyself is used, instead of thy soul. 
Then soul and self mean the same thing. When Ahi- 
thophel and Judas hung themselves, we suspect some- 


thing more than ghosts were hung. Luke 12 : 4, "Be 
not afraid of them that kill the body." Then the body 
itself Uves. And thus we read of living, dead, or mortal 
bodies. How can the body be said to die, if it never 
lives ? To affirm that the soul is the essential man, and 
never dies, and yet to use the phrase a dead man, is a 
glaring absurdity. Deceived man argues that the soul, 
considered as an independent, ever living thing, is the 
hfe of the flesh ; but God has eight times said, the 
" blood" is the life of the flesh ; and once, that a " sound 
heart" is the life of the flesh. Pro v. 14 : 30. 

Life, in the abstract, cannot be called the soul, or a 
ghost. Let the word life be substituted for soul in the 
following texts — Job 3 : 20, Wherefore is light given to 
him that is in misery, and soul unto the bitter in soul. 
Ch. 7:15, My soul chooseth strangling, and death rather 
than my soul. Ps. 66 : 9, Which holdeth our soul in 
souL Prov. 3 : 22, So shall they be soul unto thy soul. 
Jer. 52 : 33, He did continually eat bread before him all 
the days of his soul. Those who choose to follow this 
further may try the following texts — Job 10 : 1 ; 24 : 22 ; 
Ps. 66 : 9 ; Isa. 38 : 12 ; Lam. 3 : 53 ; Eom. 11 : 15 ; 1 
John 5 : 12; Gen. 23 : 1 ; Judges 16 : 30 : Luke 21 : 31 : 
John 6 : 53 ; Ps. 21 : 4. 

But the terms indicating life, such as alive^ living, 
liveth, &c., occur 950 times ; and yet forty places cannot 
be found among them, where it would not be manifestly 
absurd to call them either soul or ghost. The word 
heart occurs 970 times, which sometimes indicate life. 


There are but few places where it would not be ab- 
surd to call the mind the soul, and more absurd to call 
it a ghost. Deut. 30: 1, The blessing and the curse 
which I have set before thee, thou shalt call them to 
soul. Gen. 23 : 8, If it be your soul that I should bury 
my dead out of my sight. Isa. 46 : 8, Bring it again to 
soul^ O ye transgressors. Ps. 31 : 12, I am forgotten as 
a dead man out of soul. Jer. 51: 50, Let Jerusalem come 
into your soul. Acts 28 : 6, They changed their souls ^ 
and said that he was a god. Gol. 2:18, Vainly puffed 
up by his fleshy soul. Tit. 3:1, Put them in soul to be 


subject to magistrates. James 1 : 8, A double souled 
man is unstable in all his ways. Ch. 4 : 8, Purify your 
hearts, ye double souled. 

These are selected from seventy places where it would 
be absurd to call the mind, the soul. If a few places oc- 
cur where soul and mind can be used interchangably, so 
mind and person may be so used ; but if mind and soul 
were synonymous expressions, they could with propriety 
be always interchanged. 

Now substitute the word mind for soul. 

Gen. 2:7, And man became a living mind, 1 Sam. 
24 : 11,1 have not sinned against thee, yet thou huntest 
my mind to take it. Ch. 25 : 29, Yet a man is risen to 
pursue thee, and to seek thy mind ; but the mind of my 
lord shall be bound in the bundle of life ; but the mind 
of thine enemies shall be slung out. Ps. 40 : 14, Let 
them be ashamed and confounded together, that seek 
after my mind to destroy it. P.s. 17: 13, Deliver my 
mind from the wicked, which are thy sword. Ps. 22 : 
20, Dehver my mind from the sword, my miftd from the 
hand of the dog. Ps. 54 : 3, Oppressors seek after my 
miTid. Josh. 11 : 11, He took Hazor, and smote all the 
Qninds that were therein, with the edge of the sword, ut- 
terly destroying them, there was not any minds left to 
breathe. Isa. 38 : 17, Thou hast in love to my mind^ de- 
livered it from the pit of corruption. Isa. 53 : 10, When 
thou shalt make bis inind an offering for sin. 12 v.. Be- 
cause he hath poured out his mind unto death. Jer. 2 : 
34, In thy skirts is found the blood of the minds of the 
poor innocents. Rev. 16:3, And every living mind died 
in the sea. 

But enough. There are more than 300 places where 
it would be absurd to call the soul the mind. And if a 
few places can be found where the words are interchang- 
able, — so the eyes may be used to signify the mind or jfer- 
son, in 190 cases. Gen. 6: 8, But Noah found grace in 
the (eyes) mind of the Lord. Job 22 : 29, He shall save 
him that hath low eyes, or the humble person. Pro v. 
26 : 5, Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be 
wise in his own eyes, or mind. Deut. 7:16, Thy eye or 
mind shall have no pity on them. Ch. 28 : 26, Her eye, 
or mind shall be evil towards the husband of her bosom. 

But the eye is not the mind, because it can be used in 


a figure for the mind, nor is the mind the soul, nor the 
soul the mindy because in a figure the one may be some- 
times used for the other. 

The neck is used for the mind^ or hearty or person. Exo. 
33 : 5, Ye are a stiff-necked, or stiff-minded people. Deut. 
3 1 : 27, I know .... thy stiff-neck, or mind. Prov. 29 : 
1, He that being often reproved, hardeneth his neclc^ 
mind^ hearty or himself^ shall suddenly be destroyed. 
Twenty times the neck is used for the mind. The head 
can ten times be called the mind. Psa. 83 : 2, They that 
hate thee have lifted up the head^ mind^ or person. 

The face is thirty-eight times used for the mifid. Prov. 
21 : 29, A wicked man hardeneth his face, or mind, or 
heart, or himself. Ez. 14:6, Turn away your faces from 
all your abominations ; that is, your minds, or selves. 

The hands are forty -eight times used for the mind or 
person. Jud. 7:11, Thou shalt hear what they say, and 
afterwards shall thy hand be strengthened. 

The ear can be seventeen times called the mind or per- 
son : the mouth six times : the tongue ^yq times : and 
the feet four times. There are 320 passages of Scrip- 
ture where the members of the man can consistently be 
used for the man himself; and therefore it ought not to 
be thought surprising that the soul,though it means the 
man, may sometimes be called the miiid. 

In seventy-six places flesh can be called the soul, or a 
ghost, with as much propriety as the mind. Gen. 6:12, 
" For all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth." 
Ecc. 5:6," Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to 
sin." Isa. 49 : 26, " AW flesh shall know that I am thy Sa- 
viour." Eom. 12 : 1, " Present your bodies (that is, your- 
selves) a living sacrifice." Gal. 2 : 16, " For by the works 
of the law shall no flesh (or souls) be justified." Eph. 5 : 
28, " So ought men to love their wives as their own bo- 
dies," (or souls). 1 Sam. 18 : 1, " For Jonathan loved 
David as his own soul." Mat. 19 : 19, " Thou shalt love 
thy neighbor as thyself" These last places make the 
body, the soul, and self, one thing. 

The word heart occurs 970 times in the Bible ; yet in 
four places^ only is the fleshly organ meant ; and in al- 
most all the other places, 955, it truly means the mind. 
Now it would be just as logical to call the heart an in- 
dependent living thing, because the functions of mind 


and action are ascribed to it, and miscall it the " immor- 
tal heart," '• the deatMess heart" as to call the soul, or 
mind, or spirit, the '' immortal soul," the " immortal 
mind," " the deathless spirit," because sometimes, in ac- 
cordance with the Hebrew idiom, life and action are as 
cribed to them. 




A soul, in Scripture phraseology, means an animal, or 
creature, or life ; a breathing creature, originally de- 
signed to Hve by breathing ; whether such creature be 
living or dead. 

First : — Nephesh and psuche^ the Hebrew and Greek 
words for soul, are translated both life and creature 
when applied to beasts. Moses uses nephesh^ chay^ 
chayiah^ and chayim^ to express animal life and creature ; 
and these words are generally translated 50i^/, life^ living^ 
lives^ and creature. The very first time that the w^ord 
nephesh^ or soul^ occurs, is in Gen. 1 : 20 ; it reads, lite- 
rally, " And the Elohim said, the waters shall produce 
abundantly the creeping living soul," (or creature, — she- 
retz chayiah nephesh.) In the 2 1st verse, we find, " kal 
nephesh chayiah eramshat^'^ every living soul or crea- 
ture creeping. The 24th verse reads, " Let the earth 
bring forth the {nephesh chayiaJi^) living soul^ or living 
creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping (chay) crea- 
ture, and beast of the earth." In the 25th verse, " And 
every chay^^^ every creature. Again, in the 30th verse, 
^^ And to every thing creeping upon the earth, which 
(has) in it a living soul ; (ulekel rumesh ol earetz asher 
bu nephesh chayiah.'*'^ In Gen. 2 : 19, these living souls 
are brought before Adam, " and whatsoever he named, 
every living soul^ {nephesh chayiah) that was the name 
of it." 

We now appeal to the candid : — If nepliesh chayiah^ 
in the quotations we have given, must necessarily mean 
a living creature ; and if, in the very first place of its 


occurrence^ Moses applies it to the very lowest order of 
animal existence, to the sheretz^ which must mean some 
reptile produced by the waters^ having a creeping mo- 
tion ; and, as appears from Lev. some reptile, or amphi- 
bious creature, that the Israelites w^ere forbidden to eat, 
how can it ever mean an abstract, immortal intelligence, 
.that can be separated from the creature, and yet be 
conscious ? 

"We now give another illustration from Gen. 2 : 7, 
" And Jehovah Elohim formed man of the dust of the 
ground, and blowed into his nostrils the breath of lives, 
and man became a {ncphesh chayiahj) a living soul, (or 
living creature.") Thus we see that in all these passages, 
Moses applies the phrase nephesh chayiah^ or living soul, 
indiscriminately to all creatures, birds, beasts, insects, 
reptiles, and men. Nephesh^ signifies creature, soul, or 
breathing frame, also life — and is derived from the verb 
nesme^ to breathe ; chayiah^ is living, the participle of 
the verb to hve. All Kving creatures are, therefore, 
living souls ; and he who denies it in the face of the 
Mosaic record, when properly explained to him, is verily 
guilty in the sight of God. Adam Clarke, commenting 
upon verse 24th, acknow^ledges that nephesh chayiahy 
living soul, is " a general term to express all creatures 
endued with animal life ;" yet, because these same words 
are used for mankind, he is supposed immortal ! ! Pro- 
fessor Stuart, in his " Chrestoniathy," pag-e 86, ver. 24, 
calls nephesh chayiahy a generic term for living creature, 
animal, or animated being; 20th ver., of hving or ani- 
mated breath ; and quotes Job 41:21, '' His nephesh 
kindleth coals, and a tiame goeth out of his mouth.'* 
And nearly as clear is it, in his opinion, in Gen. 1 : 30. 
"We give a few more examples, without comment. Gen. 
6 : 19, '' And of every nephesh chayiah of all flesh, two 
of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them 
alive with thee : they shall be male and female." Gen. 
9:9, " And behold I establish my covenant with you." 
10, " And with every nephesh chayiah that is with you, 
of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth 
v;ith you." 12, " And God said, this is the token of 
the covenant which I make between me and you, and 
every nephesh chayiah that is with 3'ou, for perpetual 
generations." 15, '^ And I will remember my covenant, 

WHAT IS A SOULr ^ I J T* , 33 ' 

which is between me and you, and every nephe^i chayiah 
of all flesh ; and the waters shall no more become a flood 
to destroy all flesh." 16, " And the bow shall be in the 
cloud ; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the 
everlasting covenant which is between God and every 
nephesh chayiah of all flesh that is upon the earth." 
Lev. 1 1 : 46, " This is the law of the beasts, and of the 
fowl, and of every nephesh chayiah that moveth in the 
waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the 

In these places, nephesh chayiah is translated living 
creature, and once hfe, although living soul occurs some- 
times in the margin of the best Bibles. Why should it 
mean a difierent thing when applied to men ? Fifteen 
times chayim, lives, is rendered living, or creature. See 
Ezek. 1 : 5, 13, 15, 19, 22 ; 3: 13; 10: 15, 17, 20. Gen. 
3: 14, "Upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt 
thou eat all the days of thy chay^ 20, " And Adam 
called his wife's name chayah^ life, because she was the 
mother of all c/iay." The Septuagint has 2^oe, life, for 
chavah ; and zonton^ living, for chay. 

Lev. 21 : 18, " He that killeth a beast shall make it 
good, nephesh for nephesh^'' soul for soul. The margin 
reads life ; the text, beast for beast ; either of which 
would be just, if our translators had been consistent, as 
nephesh here undoubtedly means the whole creature ; 
and when applied to man, the whole man ; unless excep- 
tion be specially named : as where psuche^ the soul, eats 
of bodily food, while the body wears the raiment ; in 
the same way, as a man means the whole man, except 
the mind, or body, or head, be separately designated. 

We will now* omit the word nephesh where it occurs 
in the following texts, and supply the word soul^ which 
is its equivalent. Numb. 31 : 28, " Levy a tribute unto 
the Lord, of the men of war which went out to battle ; 
one soul of five hundred, both of the persons, and of th© 
beeves, and of the asses, and of the sheep." Here cattle 
and persons are indiscriminately called souls. Job 12: 
10, '^ In whose hand is the soul of every living things 
and the ruah^ breath, of all mankind." Prov. 12: 10, 
" A righteous man regardeth the soul of his beast." 
Does a man regard the invisible ghost of his beast ? 
Isa. 46 : 1, " Their idols were upon the beasts, aftd uppft 


the cattle they stoop, they bow down together, 

they could not deliver the burden, but their souls are 
gone into captivity." Ps. 84: 3, " Yea, the sparrow 
hath found a house, and the swallow a nest for her soul^ 
where she may lay her young, even thine altars, O Lord 
of Hosts." Eev. 16:3, ^' And every living soul died 
in the sea." Did the immortal souls of the fishes die, 
gentle reader ? Job 41 : 20, 21, Of the leviathan it is 
said, *' Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a 
seething pot or caldron. His soul kindleth coals, and a 
flame goeth out of his mouth." Nephesh is here ren- 
dered breath. Gen. 9:4, " But flesh, with the soul 
thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." 
Lev. 17: 11-14, *' For the soul of the flesh is in the 
blood, he shall even pour out the blood thereof, for it is 
the soul of all flesh, the blood of it is for the soul thereof, 
therefore I said unto the children of Israel, ye shall eat 
the blood of no manner of flesh, for the soul of all flesh 
is the blood thereof" Deut. 12 : 23, " Only be sure 
that thou eat not the blood, for the blood is the soul, 
and thou may est not eat the soul with the flesh." If 
the soul were a ghost, leaving the body at death, as 
theologians tell us, no one could eat the soul I 1 Chron. 
11 : 19, " Shall I drink the blood of these men with their 
soul ^" Deut. 24 : 6, '' No man shall take the nether 
or upper millstone to pledge, for he taketh a man's soul 
to pledge." See also. Lev. 11:10, and Ezek. 47:9, 
where nephesh, the soul, is twice more applied to every 
living thing of the waters. 

We have enumerated thirty-two places where nephesh, 
OT psuche, are applied to the beast, and to every living 
thing. In twelve of these places it is translated life, 
twelve times a creature, twice a beast, twice self, once 
breath ; and only three times soul appears in the margin ! 
Our translators must have felt the absurdity of rendering 
nephesh or psuche, a soul, as implying an immortal ghost, 
and so they have inserted life, or something of a corpo- 
real nature, instead of soul ; for their readers might have 
inferred, that if beasts were souls, so men might be soicls 
too, and possessing only a superior animal nature, might, 
consequently, be but mortal after all. Chay, chayiah, 
and chayim occur hundreds of times, and though gene- 
rally translated life, they are sometimes translated crea- 


ture^ so tliat the inspired writers need not use the word 
nejjJiesh when they meant to express life. 

Nephesh^ the soul^ is translated life^ when the soul is in 
danger of corporeal death. We give a few instances to 
show" the sense nephesh sometimes bears. Ex. 4 : 12 
•^^ And the Lord said unto Moses, Go, return into Egypt, 
for all the men are dead which sought thy soitiy What 
could those men have done with the ghost of Moses had 
they found it ? Jos. 2 : 12-14, " Swear unto me ... that 
ye will save alive my father, and my mother, and my 
brethren, and my sisters, and all that they have, and de- 
liver our souls from death. And the men answered her, 
our souls instead of you to die, if ye utter not this our 
business." These men thought their souls could die. 
Jud. 18 : 25, " Let not thy voice be heard among us, 
lest bitter souled fellows run upon thee, and thou lose 
thy soul, with the souls of thy household." 2 Sam. 19 : 
5, " Thou hast shamed this day the faces of all thy ser- 
vants, which this day have saved thy soul, and the soul 
of thy sons, and of thy daughters, and the souls of thy 
wives, and the souls of thy concubines." Job 2 : 4, 
" Yea, all that a man hath will he give for his soul." 6. 
v., " And the Lord said unto Satan ; Behold he is in 
thine hand, only save his soul." Jer. 48 : 6, " Flee, save 
your soul, and be like the heath in the wilderness." 2 
Sam. 1:9, " Slay me, for anguish is come upon me, be- 
cause my soul is yet whole in me." Prov. 13:8," The 
ransom of a man's soul are his riches." See also 1 Sam, 
20 : 1 ; 23 : 15 ; 2 Sam. 16 : 11 ; 1 Kings 19 : 1-4 ; Pro. 
1 : 19 ; Jer. 22 : 25 ; Jonah 4:3; Ex. 21 : 23 ; Deut 
19 : 21 ; 2 Sam. 14 : 7 Gen. 19 : 17, 19 ; 27 : 16 ; 46 ; 32 
30 ; 42 : 15, 16 ; 44 : 30 ; 47 : 25 ; Ex. 1 : 14 ; 21 : 30 
Num. 35 : 31 ; Jos. 9 : 24 ; Jud. 12 : 3 ; 9:17; 1 Sam! 
19 : 5, 11 ; 22 : 23 ; 26 : 24 ; 28 : 9, 21 ; 2 Sam. 4 : 8 
23: 17; 1 Kings 1 : 12; 2 : 23 ; 3: 11; 20: 31, 39, 42 

2 Kings 1: 13, 14; 7: 7; 10: 24; 1 Ch. 11: 19; 2 Ch 
1 : 11; Es. 7: 3, 7; 8: 11; 9: 16; Job 6: 11; 13 : 14 
Ps. 31 : 13 ; 38 : 12 ; 64 : 1 ; Pr. 1 : 18 ; 4 : 13 ; 22 : 23 
6 : 26 ; 7 : 23 ; 13 : 3 ; 16 : 15 ; Is. 15 : 4 ; 38 : 12 ; 43 
4; Jer. 4:30; 11 :21; 19 : 7, 9 ; 34:20,21; 38: 2, 16 
39: 18; 44: 30; 45: 5; 46:26; 49:37; Lam. 2 : 19 

3 : 53 ; 5:9; Ezk. 3:18; 13 : 10, 22 ; 32 : 10 ; Jonah 
I: 14; Deut. 24:6. 


Here are ninety -six places in which the word nephesh 
occurs in the original ; it is generally translated life. 
"When you read them you will be astonished to find that 
the soul of man is waylaid, watched, hunted, and killed, 
by human enemies. These, added to the thirty-two 
texts given before, and twenty-two times where nephesh 
is rendered life and living^ when applied to beasts^ wall 
make 150 times in all, where fiephcsh is rendered life and 
living ; but it would shock all common sense to suppose 
an immortal soul is meant in any one case. 

There are scores of other places where nephesh means 
life^ or ^person endowed wdth life^ where our translators 
have used the word soul. Now, if the w^ord soul means 
an immortal ghost, there can be no reasonable objection 
to a substitution, just to test its congruity. 1 Sam. 24 : 
11, "I have not sinned against thee, yet thou huntest 
my ghost to take it." "What did Saul w^ant with David's 
immaterial, invisible ghost ? 1 Sam. 25 : 29, " Yet a 
man is risen to pursue and to seek thy ghost ; but the 
gliost of my Lord shall be bound in the bundle of life^ 
with the Lord thy God, and the ghosts of thy enemies, 
then shall he sling out. ^^ Can immortal souls be slung 
out of the bundle of life ? 1 Sam. 26 : 21, '' I will no 
more do thee harm, because my ghost was precious 
in thine eyes this day." Ps. 35 : 4, " Let them be con- 
founded and put to shame that seek after my ghost." 
Ps. 40 : 16, " Let them be ashamed and confounded to- 
gether that seek after my ghost to destroy it." What I 
destroy an immortal soul, David ! Ps. 7 : 1, " Save me 
from him that persecutes me, and deliver me ; lest he 
tear my ghost like a lion, rending it in pieces, while 
there is none to deliver : *** if I have rew^arded evil *** 
let the enemy persecute my ghost and take it ; yea, let 
him tear down my chayah^ hfe upon the earth." Ps. 26 : 
9, " Take not aw^ay my nephesh^ ghost, with sinners, nor 
my chayah^ life, with men of blood." Ps. 22 : 20, " De- 
liver my nephesh, ghost, from the sword ; my nephesh^ 
ghost, from the hand of the dog, save me from the lion's 
mouth." See also, 1 Sam. 25 : 29 ; Ps. 17 : 13 ; 35 : 12, 
17 ; 54 : 3, 4 ; 55 : 18 ; 56 : 6 ; 57 : 4, 6 ; 59 ; 3 ; 66 : 9 ; 
69:18; 70:2; 71:10,13; 74:19; 86 ; 14 ; 94 : 21 ; 
97 : 10 ; 109 : 20, 31 ; 120 : 2, 6 ; 124 : 7 ; 123 : 4 ; 142 ; 
4 ; 143 : 12 ; Pr. 29 : 10 ; Jer. 20 : 19, 


In all these examples, human enemies seek to destroy 
the souls of the righteous. Do you tell us that soul 
means here life or person ? Allowed ; and why not life 
or person in every case, where other than animals are in- 
tended ? I have before me 118 selected texts where ne- 
2^hesh is translated soul^ where it undoubtedly means 
life^ person^ or self; but the texts presented will suffice 
for those willing to receive the truth. As for the rest, 
if they believe not Moses and the prophets, neither would 
they be persuaded, though one should rise from the 


The Greek term psuche is the only Greek word used 
for soul. It comes from psucho^ to breathe ; to blow ; 
its primary meaning is the breath, a living being, any 
animal that lives by breathing ; the soul. Life is a se- 
condary and an accommodated use of the term. Moses 
wrote in Hebrew, " and man became nephesh chayioh^'^ 
which Paul translates into Greek, 1 Cor. 15 : 45, " The 
first made, Adam was made into psuchen zosan^ a living 
soul," or creature. Again, Ps. 16 : 10, David wrote, 
" For thou wilt not leave my nephesh in sheol ;" which 
Peter translates, Acts 2 : 27, " Thou wilt not leave my 
psuche in hadesy Thus then we have inspired authority 
for making psuche equal to nephesh. In Exo. 4 : 19, it 
reads, "The Lord said unto Moses, Go, return in Egypt, 
for all the men are dead which sought thy nephesh^ 
Compare Mat. 2 : 20 : " Arise, and take the young child 
and his mother, ard go into the land of Israel, for they 
are dead which sought the young child's psuche.^'' As 
these texts correspond, so psuche^ here, means the same 
as nephesh^ there. Eead 1 Kings 19 : 9-14, " For the 
children of Israel have .... slain thy prophets with the 
sword ; and I, even I only, am left ; and they seek my 
nephesh to take it away." Pom. 11 : 3, "Lord, they 
have killed thy prophets, and digged down thy altars ; 
and I am left alone, and they seek my psuche^ The 
Greeks need not use psuche to express simply life, as 
they have more appropriate words, therefore, when 
translated life^ it carries with it the idea of being. As 


life is essential to the conscious existence of the creature, 
so psuche sometimes equally represents life and being. 
We give a few examples of its use. 

Phil. 2 : 30, " For the work of Christ, he was nigh 
unto death, not regarding his psuche.'''' Luke 14 : 26, 
" If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and 
mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, 
yea, and his own psuche (immortal soul, shall we say ?) 
also, he cannot be my disciple." Acts 15 : 26, " Men 
that have hazarded their psuchas for the name of our 
Lord Jesus Christ." Can men hate and hazard the loss 
of their " immortal" souls for the sake of Christ .? But 
they can hazard their souls, or lives, or being, for the 
present time. Luke 9 : 24. " For whosoever will save 
his psuche (" immortal" soul ?) shall lose it : but whoso- 
ever will lose hm psuche (" immortal" soul ?) for my sake, 
the same shall save it. For what is a man advantaged, 
if he gain the whole world and lose himself, or be cast 
away ?" To lose the mortal soul then is to lose himself, 
his being. See also in Luke 17 : 33, a similar expres- 
sion. John 12 : 25, '' He that loveth his psuche shall lose 
it, {apolesia^ shall destroy it ;) and he that hateth his 
psuche in this world, shall keep it unto zoen aionion^ life 
for ages." Eev. 12: 11. ^' And they loved not their 
psuchen unto the death." Mark 3:4. " Is it lawful to 
do good on the Sabbath days, or to do evil ? to save 
psuche^ or to apokteinai ; kill ?" Luke 6 : 9, says, "des- 
troy it." The soul then can be killed and destroyed, and 
that this means literal death, is evident by the allusion 
to beasts in the context. Rev. 16:3. " And every 
psuche zoes, living soul died in the sea." In Mat. 16 : 
24-27 ; and Mark 8 : 34-38, our translators, by putting 
life for psuche, have hidden the allusion to " himself," 
and the period of reward referred to. 

Matt. 10 : 28, has been often quoted as favoring the 
separate existence of the soul. But when properly 
translated, and compared with the parallel account of 
Luke, it does not furnish the shadow of a shade of sup- 
port to the Pagan fable. " Fear not them who apoktei- 
nonton, murder (in the sense of cutting in pieces,) the 
soma, body, but cannot apokteinai, kill, (in the sense of 
utterly destroy) the psuche, soul or being ; but rather 
fear him who is able apolesai^ to destroy both {psuche 


and soma) body and being, in Gehenna." The meaning 
undoubtedly is, that wicked men can only destroy the 
present being of the righteous, and that God could raise 
them up again ; but if they apostatized to save their 
. present lives, that God was able — which implies that he 
would do it — to destroy their entire being in Gehenna. 
Luke 12:4, "I say unto you, my friends^ be not afraid 
of them that kill the body, and after that have no more 
that they can do. But I will forewarn you, whom ye 
shall fear : Fear him, who, after he has killed, has power 
to cast into Gehenna ; yea, I say unto you. Fear him." 
The very allusion to the place of destruction, Gehenna^ 
shows that it means the destruction of being. See the 
term, Gehenna, explained in a subsequent page. He 
that insists that Matthew means ^.psuche^ that can exist 
in life, while the body is dead, must consistently explain 
what Matthew says, 10; 39, "He that findeth \i\& psuche 
shall lose it : and he that loseth his psuche for my sake, 
shall find it :" for here the same general sentiment is 
conveyed. A free translation removes all the difficulty. 
Harwood renders Matt. 10:28, "Fear not those who 
can only inflict upon you bodily pain and torture, and 
deprive you of a precarious being — but whose power 
extends no farther. But let that great Being be the 
object of your fear, who can involve both soul and body 
in total and everlasting destruction. Let that great 
Being, I repeat it, be the object of your constant fear." 
Every reasonable person must perceive that psuche 
means a person's self The learned know that Matthew, 
who probably wrote his gospel in Hebrew, uses a great 
many Hebrew idioms ; while Luke, who wrote in a 
purer style of Greek, avoids, to a certain extent, these 
Hebrew idioms. Thus we find that Luke often explains 
Matthew. It was customary for the Hebrews to use 
the expressions, my soul, your soul, instead of the reflec- 
tive pronouns, myself, yourself, &c. It is evident that 
Luke understood a man's soul to be himself, — nothing 
more, nothing less, — and, although he was a Doctor, he 
evidently had not graduated into the Pagan philosophic 
theology of the present day. 



Mat. 6 : 25, " Therefore I charge you ; be not anxious 
about your psuche J what ye shall eat, or what ye shall 
drink ; nor about your (soma) body, what ye shall wear. 
Is not the psuche a greater gift than food ; and the body 
than raiment ?" Lu. 12: 19, " And I will say to my 
psuche, Psuche, thou hast much goods laid up for many 
years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry." What 
the rich man is said to have laid up for his psuchem ver. 
19th, is in the 21st verse said to be laid up for himself. 
But, gentle reader, does the " immortal soul" eat and 
drink ? Yea, the soul must eat to live! Ex. 12: 16, 
" No manner of work shall be done in (the first and 
seventh day of the passover,) save that which every 
nephesh must eat." 2 Kings 12: 4, " The money that 
every nephesh is set at." 1 Chron. 5: 21, '^ They took 
away their cattle; of their camels fifty thousand, of their 
sheep two hundred and fifty thousand, of the asses two 
thousand, and oi nephesh oi \x\q\\ one hundred thousand." 
Numb. 19: 16, '* Whosoever toucheth one that is slain 
with a sword in the open fields, or (a meth nephesh^ a 
dead soul, or the bone of a nephesh, or a grave, shall bo 
unclean seven days." In the first three examples from 
the Old Testament, man appears in the text, but soul in 
the margin ; but in the last, both text and margin are 
silent. Were the translators perfectly honest in this ? 
But, what would have become of the immortal soul 
theory, if these texts had been rightly translated ? We 
know not w^hat language could more expressively point 
out the mortality of the soul of man. The soul not 
only eats and drinks, but has bones and dies, and defiles 
him who touches it. In John 10: 24, psuche is trans- 
lated us. 

In the following quotations, nephesh is variously 
translated, but is rtipresented as eating bodily food : — 
Lev. 7: 20, " But the soul that eateth of the flesh of the 
sacrifice." 27th verse, " Whatsoever soul it be that 
eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut 
off from his people." Lev. 17: 12, ^' No soul of you 
shall eat blood." 15th ver. " And every soul that eateth 
that which died of itself, or that which was torn of 


beasts, he (that soul) shall both wash his clothes, and 
bathe himself in water," &c. Do ghosts eat torn flesh 
and blood, wash their clothes, and bathe themselves ? 
We shall be told soul here means the person himself. 
To be sure it does ; and so it does in every other place 
in which the word occurs : though life^ the essential 
attribute of self, would sometimes better express the 
sense. Deut. 12 : 20, '' Because thy soul longeth to eat 
flesh ; thou mayest eat flesh, whatsoever thy soul lusteth 
after." Ps. 78 : 18, " They tempted God in their heart, 
by asking meat for their nephesh?'^ But improperly 
translated lust. Pr. 16 : 26, " The nephesh of him that 
laboreth, laboreth for himself; for his mouth craveth it 
of him." If nephesh be a ghost, then the ghost labors 
for bread, and the mouth of the ghost craveth it at the 
hand of the ghost. Prov. 27: 7, " The full soul treadeth 
under foot a honeycomb ; but to the hungry/ soul^ every 
bitter thing is sweet." Ecc. 6:7, " All the labor of 
man is for his mouth, and yet the nephesh is never filled." 
How absurd to suppose a ghost is here intended ; won- 
der why they translated nephesh, appetite ! See also, 
Exo. 12: 15, 19; Lev. 7 : 18, 21, 25 ; 17:10; 19:8; 
26 : 6, 11 ; Numb. 11:6; 21 : 4, 5 ; Deut. 12 : 15, 21 ; 
14 : 26 ; 1 Sam. 2:16; Job 6 : 7 ; 33 : 20 ; Ps. 103 : 1, 
2; 107:5,9,18; Pr. 6 : 30 ; 10:3; 13:4,25; 16:24; 
19: 15; 25:25; 27: 27; Ecc. 2: 24; 6 : 2, 3 ; Isa. 29: 
8; 32:6; 58:3,5,10,11; Jer. 31 : 14, 25; 50:19; 
Lam. 1 : 11, 19 ; 2 : 12 ; Mic. 7:1; Mat. 6: 25 ; Luke 
12: 19,28; Eev. 18: 14. 

Here are seventy-two texts where the soul eats of 
earthly bread and milk, of flesh and blood, and honey, 
and drinks water. And all this eating is done by the 
soul, even when mentioned with the body, and while the 
body wears the raiment. Here again the conclusion is 
irresistible, that the soul means no more nor less than 
the person himself As it would be in the highest de- 
gree absurd to call the soul a separate entity, a ghost 
that can exist without body or parts, in more than six 
hundred places, which we have, and shall enumerate, 
where the word nephesh occurs ; so in the other two 
hundred places where there is nothing in the context to 
determine its material and mortal nature, it is absurd 


and wicked to infer that it is immaterial and immortal, 
to favor a Pagan fable, in the face of these plain and nu- 
merous expressions of God's word. But the soul not 
only eats and drinks, but can be defiled by touching a 
dead carcase. Lev. 22 : 6, " The soul which hath 
touched any such (unclean carcase,) shall be unclean 
until even, and shall not eat of the holy things, unless 
he (the soul) wash his flesh with water." Job 6 : 7, 
" The things that my soul refuseth to touch, are my sor- 
rowful meat." See also, Lev. 5 : 2, 3 ; 7:21; 11 : 43, 
44 ; Numb. 19 : 13, 22. Here are twelve more instances 
where the soul can handle the dead carcase, and eat 
food. So the soul is the person. 


Deut. 10 : 22, " Thy fathers went down into Egypt 
with three score and ten nephesh ;" translated, persons. 
These are the same seventy souls that came out of the 
loins of mortal Jacob. 

Numb. 31:35, " And thirty- two thousand nephesh in 
all, of women." Verse 40, " Of the nephesh^ were six- 
teen thousand ; of which the Lord's tribute was thirty- 
two nephesh;'''' persons. 46 ver. " Sixteen thousand 

Ezk. 27 : 13, " They traded the nephesh^ of men, and 
vessels of brass in the market." Rev. 18 : 13, " They 
traded in beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, 
and slaves, and j^swcAe of men." 

Deut. 24 : 7, " If a man be found stealing a nephesh 
of his brethren of the children of Israel, and maketh 
merchandize of his nephesh^ and selleth his nephesh ; 
then that thief shall die ; and thou shalt put away evil 
from among you." In this text nephesh occurs three 
times ; once it is translated, any, and twice, him. If we 
w^ere to apply the strict grammatical precision to this 
verse, as our friends do in their endeavors to pervert 
certain texts, to favor the fondly cherished fable of the 
separate existence of the soul, then w^e might say, that 
the stolen soul had a soul that might be sold. Now, if 
a nephesh be indeed an immaterial ghost, then, we have 


here, the ghost of a ghost, gentle reader, and that is as 
much as can be found in the immortal soul theory ; 
surely it is less than nothing, and vanity ! 

Numb. 19 : 18, " And a clean nephesh shall take hys- 
sop, and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it upon the 
tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon all the nephesh 
that were there." Could a clean, invisible ghost per- 
form all this ceremony ? Is it wonderful that those who 
wish to conceal the meaning of nephesh^ should twice 
render it person here ? 

See also, Prov. 14: 10; Gen. 14:21; 30:6; Exod. 
16: 16; Lev. 19: 15; 27:2; Numb. 5:6; 31 : 35 ; 40: 
46 ; 2 Sam. 14:14; Jer. 52 : 29, 30 ; Ezk. 17 : 17. In 
all these places, nephesh is rendered person^ but in most 
of them the margin reads soul. 


See Numb. 31 : 19 ; 35 : 11, 15, 30 ; Deut. 27 : 25 ; 
Josh. 20 : 3, 9 ; 1 Sam. 22 : 22 ; Prov. 28 : 17. We 
give a few as they stand. 

Here nephesh is translated person^ without any note in 
the margin ! Numb. 31 : 19, " Whosoever hath killed 
any nephesh^ Why have the translators striven to blot 
out the evidence that these passages afford of the nature 
and mortality of the soul of man ? And why do learned 
sectarians cling so closely around the King^s version, 
which they know is thus so glaringly and shamefully 
corrupted ? Is it because they are aware that a new 
and correct version of the original text would overturn 
all their creeds ? We call upon the lovers of truth to 
choose between Creedism and Christianity. Ye cannot 
at the same time serve God and Mammon. If you are 
determined to cleave to the loaves and fishes, and the 
popularity of sectarianism, we pray you, for consistency 
sake, to abjure the name of Christian, and fight under 
your own appropriate colors. 

Numb. 35 : 11 ; " That the slayer may flee (to the 
city of refuge) which killeth any nephesh^ at unawares.-' 
15th ver. " That every one that killeth any nephesn, at 
unawares, may flee thither." 30th ver. " Whosoever 
killeth any nephesh^ the murderer shall be put to death 
by the mouth of witnesses." Deut. 27 : 25, " Cursed 


be he that taketh reward to slay an innocent nephesh^ 
1 Sam. 22 : 22, " I have occasioned the death of all the 
nephesh of thy father's house." Prov. 28 : 17, *^ A man 
that doeth violence to the blood of any nephesh^ shall 
flee to the pit ; let no man stay him." If the soul has 
blood, and may be slain, what becomes of its boasted 
immortality .? 


Twenty-five times is nephesh^ the soul^ rendered hirm- 
self^ herself^ and themselves ; w^hich we hold to be con- 
clusive proof that the translators so understood its 
meaning. Lev. 11 : 43, " Ye shall not make your neph- 
csh abominable with any creeping thing, neither shall ye 
make your nephesh unclean w'ith them." So in verse 44, 
nephesh is twice translated yourselves. Josh. 23 : 11, 
" Take good heed, therefore, unto your nephesh^ that ye 
love the Lord your God." Esth. 4: 13, " Think not 
with thy Tz^jote/t, that thou shalt escape." Job 18: 4, 
" Ho teareth his nephesh in his anger." We wonder 
whether Job tore his ghost ! Ps. 131 : 2, " Surely I 
have quieted my nephesh^ as a child that is weaned." 
Isa. 46 : 2, "But their nephesh are gone into captivity." 
Jer. 3 : 11,'' Backsliding Israel hath justified her nephesh 
more than treacherous Judah." Isa. 47 : 14, "They 
shall not deliver their nephesh from the power of the 
flame." So material fire will burn up the soul ! See 
also, Jer. 37 : 9 ; 51 : 14 ; Amos 2 : 14, 15 ; Deut. 4:5; 
Esth. 9:31; 1 Kings 19 : 4 ; Job 32 : 2 ; Ps. 81:3; 
Jer. 17:21; Amos 6:8; Jonah 4:8; Prov. 6 : 16. 
In most of these places, the margin reads soul. 

Isa. 5 : 14, " Therefore sheol hath enlarged her neph- 
esh. The grave hath enlarged her being, and opened 
her mouth without measure." Surely the grave hath 
no ghost J not even in a figure. Gen. 27 : 4, 19, 25, 31, 
says, that Isaac's soul blessed his son ; but ver. 7 and 10 
says, that he himself blessed his son. So nephesh^ the 
soul, always means self. In Numb. 30 : 2, 4-13, If a 
man or w^oman bind his or her nephesh, is tw^elve times 
repeated ; yet ver. 3, declares, she bound herself. 1 Pet. 
3 : 20, " While the ark was preparing, wherein few, that 
is eight psuchcy were saved by water." 2 Pet. 2 : 5, 


these souls are called persons. We could give one hun- 
dred and ten similar examples, if it were necessary. 

In two hundred and six places, the flesh and body are 
terms used to signify the man himself ; if, therefore, the 
flesh means the person, the body means the person, and 
the soul means the person ; then are flesh, body, and 
soul, synonimous expressions. Ps. 145 : 21, " Let all 
yiesh, (persons^) bless his holy name, forever and ever." 
Eccl. 5 : 6, " Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy j^eshj 
{thyself^) to sin." Isa. 49 : 26, ^' And aWjleshj (people^) 
shall know that I, the Lord, am thy Saviour." Jer. 25 : 
31, " He will plead with oXX fleshy {persons ;) he will give 
them that are wicked to the sword." Gen. 7:15, " All 
flesh:' Ver. 21, " All flesh died." Phil. 1 : 20, " Christ 
ehall be magnified in my body^ {ov person.y Rom. 12 : 1, 
" That ye present your bodies^ (j^ersons^) a living sacri- 
fice, holy, acceptable unto God." Eph. 5 : 28, ^' So 
ought men to love their wives, as their own bodies^ 

(selves.y^ Ps. 63 : 1, " God my soul thirsteth 

for thee, my flesh longeth for thee." Here is a pa- 
rallelism, in which soul and flesh are made equally to 
represent the person. Here is another: Ps. 16: 10, 
" Thou wilt not leave my soul in the grave^ (in sheol^) 
neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption." 
Here soul, body, and Holy One, or Christ himself, are 


"We propose to show, that where nephesh and psuche 
are translated heart or mind^ that the life and person are 
meant in every instance. Exod. 23 : 9, " For ye know 
the nephesh (soul, or feelings, or life,) of a stranger, 
seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt." Com- 
pare 1 : 14, " And they made their nephesh (souls, or 
lives,) bitter with hard bondage." Numb. 20 : 15, " We 
have dwelt in Egypt a long time ; and the Egyptians 
vexed us and our fathers:^ Then it was the us and the 
fathers themselves that were afflicted ; for who could 
tell aught about the invisible ghost of a stranger. See 
also, Deut. 24 : 15 ; Ezek. 24: 25 ; 31 : 10 ; Isa. 64 : 7, 
where the soul means self. Pro v. 14: 10, " The heart 


knoweth the bitterness of his nephesh ;" the sorrows of 
his life and being ; for the heart surely has no ghost. 
Prov. 27 : 9, " Ointment and perfume rejoice the heart : 
so doth the sweetness of a man's friend, from the counsel 
of the nephesh^'''' {soul, or his counsel.) Ps. 35 : 25, " Let 
them not say in their hearts. Ah, ah, our 7iephesh^ (soulsy 
or we,) would have it so : let them not say, we have 
swallowed him up." Ps. 10: 3, " The wicked boasteth 
of his soul's desire ;" his desire. Eph. 6 : 6, " Doing 
the will of God from the psuche,^^ (soul, with our whole 
person, heartily.) — (Lam. 3:51; Ezek. 25 : 6.) Col. 3 : 
23, " And whatsoever ye do, do it with the sow/," (with 
the whole person ; earnestly.) Here are eleven times 
the soul is rendered heart. In the following texts the 
soul is six times rendered the mind. 2 Sam. 17 : 18. 
" And be bitter in soul.'' Eccl. 6:9," Better is the 
sight of the eyes, than the walking of the soul." That 
is, better are good eyes to the lame than good legs to the 
blind. Mic. 7:3, " That they may do evil with both 
hands earnestly, the prince asketh, and the judge asketh 
for a reward ; and the great man, he uttereth the mis- 
chief of his soul : so they wrap it up." He uttereth his 
mischief Acts 14: 2, "But the unbelieving Jews 
stirred up the Gentiles, and made their psuchas, {souls,) 
evil affected against the brethren ;" made them evil 
affected. Phil. 1 : 27, " That .... I may hear .... 
that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one psuche, (soul,) 
striving together for the faith of the Gospel." That ye 
be of one disposition, united in your endeavors to spread 
the faith ; that ye all may be one, even as I am one with 
the Father. Heb. 12 : 3, " Lest ye be wearied, and 
faint in your psuchais'' (souls.) In yourselves ; a para- 
phrase, for the sake of emphasis. 


Numb. 19 : 20, " But the man that shall bo unclean, 
and shall not purify himself, that nephesh, (man, trans. 
soul,) shall be cut off from among the congregation." 
Gen. 17 : 14, " The uncircumcised man child is the same 
soul that shall be cut off from his people." Lev. 5 : 1-4, 
" If a nephesh, (man, tr. soul,) sin, ami hear the voice of 


swearing, and is a wntness, whether he hath seen or 
known of it, if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his 
iniquity. Or if a iiephesh, (man, tr. soul,) touch any 

unclean thing .... he also shall be unclean or if 

he, the soulj or ma7i, touch the uncleanness of man .... 
when HE knoweth it, he shall be guilty. Or, if a nephesh 
swear, pronouncing with his lips to do evil, or to do 
good .... when he knoweth of it, then he shall be guilty." 
Here the soul hearing, touching, having Hps, is identified 
by the personal pronouns to be the identical man. 
Could a ghost do these things ? Lev. 6 : 2, " If a 
nephesh, [soul, or man,) sin ... . and he unto his neigh- 
bour, &c in any of all these that a man doeth . , . . 

then he shall restore." The same person called a soul 
in the second verse is called a man in the third. Ezek. 
18:4, " The soul (the man,) that sinneth, {he) shall die." 
Can an immortal, never-dying soul, die ? Yet the 13th 
verse asks concerning him that commits abominations, 
" Shall he live ? he shall not live : he hath done all these 
abominations ; he shall surely die ; his blood shall be 
upon him." But a ghost has no blood, so the soul is 
the mortal man, that sinning and not repenting, shall 
die, and remain dead forever. Six times in this chapter 
is a soul called a man. See also, Ezek. 14: 14, 18 ; 3 : 
19,21; 33: 5, 9; Exod. 12:4, 15, 19 ; 31:14; Lev. 
18 : 22, 29 ; 7 : 25 ; 16 : 29 ; 17 : 12-15 ; 22 : 3 ; Numb. 
15 : 30, 31. 

In Lev. 4 : 27, the nephesh of the comnaon people is 
translated any one of the people. 

But the nature and mortality of the soul is, if possible, 
made clearer still, in Numb. 19: 13, "Whosoever 
touch eth the meth nephesh, the dead soul of any man 
that is dead, and purifieth not himself . . . that (nephesh) 
soul, shall be cut off from Israel." Here one of the 
" whosoever" is called a soul, that can touch a dead 
soul a Can any language more forcibly teach the mor- 
tality of the soul ? Deut. 24 : 7, " If a man be found 
stealing a nephesh, (soul,) of his brethren of the children 
of Israel, and maketh merchandize of him, (that is, of 
the stolen soul,) or selleth him ; then that thief shall die ; 
and thou shalt put evil away from among you." Here 
the nephesh is translated any. In Judges 18 : 25, bitter 
of soul fellows, is rendered angry fellows.- Ps. 105 : 18, 


" The feet of Joseph they hurt with fetters : his nephesh 
came into irons ;" translated, he. 

We have now presented thirty cases, w^here nephesh^ 
undoubtedly means the man himself, even in the opinion 
of the translators ! 

Nephesh is translated fish^ in Isa. 19 : 10, " They shall 
be broken in the purposes thereof, all that make sluices 
and ponds for (nephesh^) fish." 





We have already answered this question in the nega- 
tive, in the previous chapter, by proving that the soul is 
the man, and that the soul or man can die, and does 
die ; yet those who are aware of the evasions of those 
determined to uphold the traditions of the fathers, will 
justify us in bringing forward more testimony. 

Thirty times the Bible ascribes the term nepheshj 
{soul,) to every living thing moving in the air or waters. 
Are the sonls of these creatures immortal ? The terms, "^ 
^' immortal soul," " never-dying soul," or " deathless*^ 
spirit," although so frequently used by theologians in i^ 
these days of superstition, cannot be found any where 
in the Bible. The word immortal is but once used int^ 
the authorized version, and is applied to God. See 
1 Tim. 1 : 17, *^ Now unto the King, eternal, immortal, 
(aphtharto, without corruption,) invisible, the only [wise] 
God." Our motto, from Isa. 57 : 16, declares that the 
soul and spirit can fail, before God ; therefore must the 
soul be mortal ; and, in accordance therewith, we find 
the word m^ortal used seven times, mortality once, and 
mortally twice, in reference to man. And the reason 
why these terms are used so infrequently is, that the 
Scriptures employ the terms death, dying, corruptible, 
decaying, without the slightest exception, to the whole 
man, although a strictly literal translation of the fre- 
quently occurring term enotish^ would have given us 


very many examples of mortal man. 2 Chron. 14 : II, 
" Let not mortal man prevail against thee." Job 4:17, 
" Shall mortal man be more just than God ?" We 

/have proved the term man comprehends his whole 
t nature, and it is mere evasion of plain testimony to 

wassert that a part of man is mortal, and a part immortal. 
The word declares that man, without exception of parts, 
is mortal, which cannot be true if the soul, as the es- 
sential man, be immortal. I Cor. 15 : 53, 54, " For thi& 

corruptible, must put on incorruption, and this mortal 
must put on immortality, (at the resurrection)." Mark, 
the mortal and corruptible man, if a Christian, puts on 
at a future period^ something that he does not at present 
possess, and that something is the very opposite of cor- 
ruption and mortality, even incorruption and immor- 
tality. The word mortality is also found in Rom. 6 : 
12; 8: 11 ; 2 Cor. 4:11. In these three places the 
body is called mortal ; now, as there is but one living 
principle in man, if that inheres in his body, then are 
tjie phrases, living man, and living human body, of like 

^-^gnification ; for to say that the soul i& living and im- 
mortal, abstracted from the body, or man, and the 
j^body is mortal and therefore living, is to say that there 

^^are two living men in each man, which is an absurdity. 
The word mortality is found in 2 Cor. 5 : 4, " That 
mortality might be swallowed up of life." Paul is here 
speaking of two tabernacks, or church arrangements ; 
the one church is for a season only, and is earthly ; the 
other is everlasting, and is heavenly. That, while we 
are in this earthly church, we groan being burthened 
with trouble and mortality^ yet he is not desirous of 
putting off this connection with the earthly church ; 
but he is exceedingly desirous of being covered by the 
New Jerusalem Church, which is to come down from 
Heaven, that his present mortal nature may be absorbed 
in hfe everlasting, or immortality ; when (chap. 4 : 14,) 
" the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesua, and 
shall present us with you." Thus does Paul declare, 

/that himself, and his Corinthian brethren, were mortal, 

^ntil the resurrection. 

/ Mortally^ occurs Deut. 19: 11, and Job 4: 17. Im- 

^ mortality is used only jive times ; twice it refers to the 

^resurrection, when the saints are to assume it. See 


1 Cor. 15 : 53, 54; 2 Tim. 1 : lO ; once in Eom. 2:7, 
where it is an object held out to be sought after. " To i,^ 
them who, by patient continuance in well doing, seek for ^--^ 
glory, honor, and immortaUty, God will render eternal"^^^ 
life." Could we be consistently urged to seek for what 
all men naturally possess ? and could eternal life be said 
to be conditionally bestowed only upon the seekers, if 
the common theory were true ? For what a man hath 
already, why doth he yet seek after ? But if we seek 
for that we do not at present possess, then do we with 
patience wait for it. Immortality is likewise applied to 
God, 1 Tim. 6: 16, " Who only hath immortality." As 
natural immortality is here declared to be the exclusive 
attribute of God, the assumption of natural immortality 
by man, is the assumption of an exclusive attribute of 
Jehovah ! Again, in JRom. 6 ; 23, Eternal life, or immor- 
tality, is said to be the gift of God, through Christ, to 
the justified only. But abundant life, everlasting life, 
shall live for ever, which mean of necessity, the per- 
petuity of conscious being, or immortality, and nothing 
else, are terms that are so often applied to the justified 
through Christ, and to the justified only^ that it is need- 
less to particularize. It has been attempted to force 
these terms from their proper and obvious meaning, 
giving to them the signification of everlasting glory and 
happiness. But that the terms mean perpetual con- 
scious existence, in opposition to the continued extinction 
of conscious existence or death, must be obvious to all 
who will collate the passages. 

Suppose we put the " orthodox" construction on 
certain plain passages, that we may see how incongruous 
they read. John 3 : 16, " For God so loved the world,./ 
that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever , / / 
belie veth in him should not (have everlasting life in tor- / 
meat, but) have everlasting (happiness and glory.)" We ^ 
consider this a fair exhibition of the construction which j 
those who believe in the immortaUty of the soul would |/ 
put upon this verse. But this is not only a shameful 
adding to the word of God, forbidden in Prov. 30 : 6, 
" Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, 
and thou be found a har," and, Eev. 22 : 18 ; but it > 
utterly destroys the sense and contrast. The proper '«/ 
contrast to everlasting hfe, is the entire extinction of J 


being; and sucli the Scriptures declare shall be the 
everiasting condition of those unfortunate beings who 
count themselves unworthy of eternal life. The " ortho- 
dox*' would be as much justified in turning the word 
love into hate^ as the word perish into everlasting life in 
misery ; yet, unfortunately, they do this to sustain their 
traditions. But, if God had already given to the wicked 
endless life, in giving them an '* immortal soul," he 
would not have offered it as the peculiar privilege of 
/tj>e righteous. Christ declares that the wicked have no 
y^e'm them — no principle of immortality in them. On 
the contrary, Paul declares, that if the spirit of him that 
- raised up Christ from the dead dwell in you, God shall 
RB-enliven your mortal bodies, (or natures,by or on ac- 
count of) his spirit that dwelleth in you. 

We give some of the Greek terms that imply mortality 
and immortality. Athanasia, without death, or death- 
lessness, is ascribed to God only, as its only natural 
possessor, in 1 Tim. 6:16, and to the resurrected saints 
in 1 Cor. 15 : 53, 54. Thanatos^ {death^) occurs often 
where even the " orthodox" would not construe it to 
^jpean eternal misery. Matt. 20 : 18, " The Son of Man 
" sjiall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the 
^^scribes, and they shall condemn him to death (thanatos) ;^^ 
not to eternal misery, surely ? Matt. 26 : 38, " My 
soul (psuche^) is exceedingly sorrowful, even unto deaths 
{fhanatos.y Matt. 10:21, "Brother shall deliver up 
the brother to dcath^ {thanatosy Luke 2 : 26, " It was 
revealed unto (Simeon) by the Holy Ghost, that he 
should not see deaths {thanatos^) before he had seen the 
Lord's Christ." Death does not mean eternal misery 
here, nor yet the separation of the soul from the body, 
for such a death, according to the orthodox, would not 
have precluded his vision of the Lord's Anointed. John 
11: 4, 13, "This sickness (of Lazarus) is not unto 
death \''' yet Jesus spake of his death. John 12 : 32, 33, 
" And I, if I be hfted up from the earth, will draw all 
men unto me. This he said, signifying what death (tha- 
natos) he should die." If thanatos^ in all these places, 
and many more we could cite, must mean the cessation 
of Hfe, so it must mean in Eom. 6 : 23, where it is con- 

Jrasted with the Hfe which God has promised. " For 
he wages of sin is deaZh {thanatos) ; but the gift of God 


is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." But ^' 
mortality, and immortality, are more often indicated 
by words implying corruption and incorraption. 2 
Pet. 2 : 12, " But these, (those that walk after the 
flesh in the lust of uncleanness,) as senseless animals 
made only to be taken and {phthoran^) rotted^ or cor- 
rupted, speak evil of what they understand not, and will 
(likewise) be {kata-phthare-sontai^) utterly rotted in their 
own corruption^ (phthora.y This passage is analagous 
to Ecc. 3 : 19, where the wise man states that irrespec- 
tive of a resurrection, there is no difference in the death 
of man and beast, as both are naturally constituted 
alike. Acts 13: 36, " For David .... was laid unto his 
fathers, and saw corruption {dia-phthoran.y If you say 
that this apphes only to his body, and that his soul 
escaped corruption, then you contradict and falsify God^s 
word, for that says David, himself of course, saw or ex- 
perienced corruption. The reference is to Ps. 16 : 10, 
" Thou wilt not leave my soul in sheol^ in the state of 
death, or, thou shalt not suffer thy Holy One to see cor- 
ruption, {diaphthorany And Paul argues that David 
could not have spoken of himself, because his soul^ or 
himself, had seen corruption. Phthartos expresses its 
opposite, by the privative a being placed before it. God 
is immortal, because he is incorruptible ; men are mortal 
because corruptible in all their living parts. Incorrup- 
tion is ascribed to God in 1 Tim. 1 : 1 7 ; a correct trans- 
lation of which is, " And unto the King of the ages, 
incorruptible (a-phtharto^ invisible, the only God, be 
honor and glory, for ages of ages. Amen." Eom. 1 : 23, 
" They changed the glory of the incorruptible (a'phthar- 
tou) God, into an image made-hke to corruptible 
{phthartou) man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, 
and -creeping things." Campbell translates these ex- 
pressions by immortal God, and mortal man. Here 
men are again classed with beasts as corruptible and 
mortal, and contrasted with God, who is immortal and 
incorruptible. Surely this is plain enough for those w^ho 
are willing to receive the truth. We challenge our^^ 
opponents to produce a single instance, where any word^ , 
signifying incorruptibility, indissolubility, immortality, ots/ j 
any word of like signification, is applied to man in hisy 
natural state. 



There is an exceedingly numerous class of texts in 
the Hebrew, which strongly express the mortality of the 
soul of man, in the various appellations given unto him, 
but which are entirely obscured in our translation. 
When it is intended to designate man merely as an 
animal, or creature, he, in common with the beasts, is 
called a soul, nephesk^ as having a common origin with 
the beasts, as being made of dust, and as having with 
them a common animal nature, sustained by the common 
breath of lives. But w^hen man is spoken of in connec- 
tion with the beasts, to distiyigiiish him from them he is 
called, in all places — excepting Exod. 11:7, and 19 : 13, 
where he is called a man of virtue or courage, — by the 
name Adam^ pointing out his relationship to the first 
man. The places may be found under the head of 
" Beast joined with Man," in Cruden. 

There are ten different Hebrew words, that, in the 
common version, are rendered person ; and there are no 
less than seventy-eight different Hebrew words, that are 
translated by the common terms man and men. These 
Hebrew names are mostly compound nouns, so com- 
bined with an adjective, as to be expressive of a variety 
of distinct qualities of the man designated by them. 

The principal terms, how^evep, are : — 

1. Adam; man of earth. 

2. Ha- Adam ; the man Adam. 

3. Enoiish ; a mortal man. 

4. Nephesh ; a soul, animal life, or breath ; an animal 

intended to live by breathing. 

5. Nephesh- Adam ; an animal, or creature made of 

earth, that lives by breathing. 

6. Eesh ; a man of valor, or virtue 

7. Baal ; an owner, master. 

8. Gever ; men of strength. 

9. Anosheem ; plural of enoush^ mortals. 

10. Metheem ; plural of death ; metaphor for men, — 

literally, men as subjects of death. 

11, Kosho ; a bad man. 

12. . Khokhom ; a wise man. 


In consequence of the neglect to transfuse the idea 
conveyed by these compound terms, the meaning of 
many passages of Scripture is completely obscured in 
the authorized version. Examples : — Gen. 2:5," There 
was not an Adam to till the Adam-ah?'' Gren. 1 : 26, 
^' Let us make Adam (a man of earth) in our image." 
Josh. 5: 13, " When Joshua was by Jericho , . Behold, 
there stood {eesh) a man of virtue, or courage, over 
against him." Job 10 : 5 ; addressing God, Job says, 
^^ Are thy days as the days of (enoush^) a mortal ? Or 
thy years like even the time of {gever^) a strong man ?" 
If our translators had honestly translated these terms, 
what would have become of their favorite theory of the 
immortality of man ? Here man is not only designated 
as mortal, but is contrasted with God on that very ac- 
count ; and yet, strange to say, theologians tell us that/ 
the existence of the souls of all men, runs parallel with^ 
the existence of God ! and, consequently, that Job's ^, 
contrast is a failure. It would be folly to call m,any^ 
mortal, if his essential nature was immortal. Ps. 8 : 4, 
'^ What is {enoush^) a mortal, that thou art mindful of 
him ? and even of the son of Adam, (as was man in his 
best estate,) that thou visitest him ?" Ps. 9 : 20, " Put 
them in fear, O Lord : that the nations may know them- 
selves to be but {anosheem^) mortals." Put the ortho- 
dox construction on this last verse, and it becomes 
nonsense. Put them in fear, that the nations may know 
that they are immortal ; that though their bodies might 
be destroyed, their souls would live for ever ! Pro v. 
30 : 2 ; the common version reads, " Surely I am more 
brutish than any man, and hav^ not the understanding 
of a man ;" which thus appears hke two ways of affirm- 
ing the same thing : while in the Hebrew, the exact use 
of terms, by a beautiful antithesis, gives a finished 
character to the passage. Thus, " Surely I am more 
ignorant than {cesh^ a man of virtue,) I have not even 
the understanding of ^^am, {a man of earth.)" 

Adam^ a man of earth, is translated man one hundred 
and sixty-eight times, men twenty-seven times, and sons 
of men twenty -one times ; making two hundred and six- 
teen places where man is designated as made of earth, 
and therefore mortal, w^hich places cannot be true, if the 
essential man consists of an immortal soul. Remember, 


It is this same man, made of earth, that became a living 
Boul simply by the impartation of the animating principle, 
the neshemet ruah chayim^ the breath of the spirit ol 
lives, the universal principle of all animal hfe ; which 
principle is said to be in the nostrils of every creature. 
When God created man, he called their name, that is, 
the name of the species, Adam, as being made of earth ; 
a term necessarily indicative of mortality, and given as 
expressive of his nature, even when he had not sinned. 
And God made a conditional provision for the continua- 
tion of the lives of the earthly creatures he had made, by 
planting the tree of lives within their reach. Mark too, 
that when man had sinned, God drove him from this tree, 
" Lest he should eat thereof and hve for ever." This is 
another clear testimony of the Almighty of the mortality 
of man. But after the curse, and the penalty of God's 
law, which is the extinction of being, began to be fre- 
quently executed, then was born a son of Seth, who was 
named Enos, or Enoush, that is, mortal^ and inspiration 
makes this name one of the distinguishing appellations of 
the human race. Now to apply this term to the body as 
forming only a part of the man,, and denying that it ap- 
plies to man, as man, as a compound whole, is to flatly 
contradict the plain testimony of inspiration. 

The term enoush^ a mortal^ is improperly translated 
vnayi^ thirty-seven times; and men^ ^nq times, making 
forty-two times. "We insert all the places : — Jud. 9 : 9, 
13; Job 4: 17; 5 : 17 ; 7: 1,17; 9 : 2; 10 : 4, 5, 6 ; 13: 
9; 14: 19; 15: 14; 25:4, 6; 32: 8; 33: 12; Ps. 8: 4; 
9: 19; 10: 18; 55: 11; 90:3; 103: 15; 104:15; 144: 
3 ; " Lord, what is Adam, that thou takest knowledge of 
him ! or the son of enoush, a mortal, that thou makest 
account of him ! Adam is like to vanity : his days are 
as a shadow thatpasseth away." Dan. 4 : 16 ; 7 : 4, 13 : 
6: 7, 12; 3: 10; Gen. 47:6; Isa. 13:7,12; 23: 8; 51: 
12 ; 56 : 2. Enoush is translated men, Deut. 32 : 26 ; Isa^ 
51:7; Job 28 : 4 ; Ps. 9 : 20 ; 73 : 5. 

Nepheshj is translated man, Exo. 12 : 16. Nephesh 
Adam, is translated man, Lev. 24 : 17 ; and men, 1 Chro. 
5 : 21 ; Ez. 27 : 13. Zera anosheem, the seed of mortal 
men, is translated man-child in 1 Sam. 1 : 1 L 

Anosheem J mortals, is translated men; 1 Sam. 31 : 1 ; 
2 Sam. 2- 17,4; Ezra 10:9; Jer. 43:9; 1 Sam. 4:9; 


Ez. 23 : 45 ; Job 34 : 10. It is translated of men m four- 
teen texts. Jer. 9 : 22. " Even the carcases oianosheem 
shall fall as dung upon the open field." It is translated 
person^ Jud. 9:4; Zeph. 3:4. It is translated men of 
war twenty-five times. Anosheem as a designation of 
mortal men occurs at least seventy-one times. 

Metheem^ death men, or men as subjected to death, oc- 
curs Deut. 33 : 6 ; Job 31:31; Ps. 17 : 14 ; Isa. 3 : 25 ; 
41 : 14. 

Here is the argument drawn from the names applied to 
man. In five himdred and forty places, man is designa- 
ted by terms that indicate that he is made of earth, terms 
that forcibly point out his corruptible and mortal nature. 
And one hundred and twenty-one times is man expressly 
called piortal, six hundred and sixty-one times in all ; and 
this too, in addition to the many places where he, in com- 
mon with the beasts, is termed a soul, a term, the ortho- 
dox to the contrary notwithstanding, equally expressive 
of mortality. As a set-oflF to this, there cannot be found 
one single passage, that, properly expounded, affords 
even an inference, that man in his natural state is im- 
mortal, or that he, the man, has an existence separately 
from the body. Every passage usually supposed to fa- 
vor immortality will be examined in its place. What 
then is the inevitable answer to the question, Is the soul, 
or man immortal ? All nature and experience reply No ; 
and inspiration expressly says No ; and informs us that 
the family of Abraham were buried in the cave of Mach- 
pelah ; that " David was laid to his fathers and saw cor- 
ruption, and that his sepulchre is with us to this day," 
and therefore when he spake of a soul or person, that 
was not left in the grave, neither saw corruption, he 
spake of the resurrection of Christ ; " Eor David is not 
ascended into the heavens" ; but Jesus Christ has ; 
whence he shall come in the clouds of heaven, to raise 
his sleeping saints from the dust of death. Besides all 
this, the Scriptures expressly inform us that the wicked 
shall be annihilated, which shall be considered in its place. 
But so strong is prejudice, that we are aware that so long 
as two stones of the citadel of error will hold together, 
there are many that will continue fondly to cling to 



Ps. 107. Hungry and thirstry their souls fainted in 
them. If an " immortal" soul can faint for bodily food, 
it can also starve and die. See Numb. 24 : 4 ; Ps. 107 : 
26 ; 84 : 2 ; 1 19 : 81 ; Songs 5 : 6. Supposing this figu- 
rative, yet the figure is drawn from the fact that the soul 
can faint and die. 


Lev. 16: 29, 31 ; 23 : 27, 29, 32; Num. 29: 7; Ps. 
35 : 13 ; 69 : 10 ; 143 : 12 ; Is. 58 : 3, 5, 10. Now as the 
pious soul could not be afflicted in mind by devotion to 
God, it must mean that the man is faint for food. David 
says Ps. 109 : 24, My knees are weak through fasting, 
and my flesh faileth of fatness. The person is therefore 
meant by the soul. 


This item, likewise, proves that the soul is the person, 
and is mortal. Gen. 7:4, " Every living substance 
that I have made will I destro^j^'' margin, blot out. In 
Ps. 119 : 139, cut off^ is rendered, consume ; in Exod. 8 : 
9, Ezek. 7 : 25, the same word, cut off^ is rendered, 
destroy and destritction. In Isa. 51 : 19 ; 59 : 7 ; Jer. 
4 : 6, and Ezek. 30 : 8, the margin reads break^ or break- 
ing^ but it is rendered destroy and destruction. In Jer. 
17 : 18, margin, break them with a double breach ; the 
text reads, destroy them with a double destruction. 
Esth. 3 : 13, " The letters were sent .... to destroy^ to 
kill^ and to cause to perish^ all Jews.'' From this we 
infer, that the terms blot out ^ cut off^ destroy^ broken^ kill^ 
perish^ consume., and destruction., are synonisms, con- 
veying the same idea, even in the estimation of the 
y translators themselves. The soul that is cut off and 
destroyed, perishes, and dies a corporeal death. Now 
if you examine Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12 : 15, 19 ; 31 : 14 
Lev. 7 : 20, 21, 25, 27 ; 17 : 10, 18, 29 ; 19 : 8 ; 20 : 6 
22 : 3 ; 23 : 29 ; Numb. 9:13; 15 : 30, 31 ; 19 : 13, 20, 
you will find that all these passages declare that souls 
shall be cut oj} / and once, utterly cut off ; which means 


the same as to hlot out, erase, cause to perish, hilly 
destroy, and consume souls. All this destruction is 
threatened to that soul who eats the nephesh, the soul, 
or blood, with the flesh, or eats flesh unlawfully ; or, 
that soul who touches a dead soul, and does not cleanse 
himself ; or that soul among the children of Israel, that 
worked on the sabbath. These souls are all charged with 
bodily crimes, and they are threatened with bodily suf- 
fering and death. How dare we say, then, that the soul^ 
is immortal, and cannot die the death that Grod has^ , 
threatened ! Remember, if these souls are ghosts, tha^ 
only left the body, and fled to another world consciously 
to exist, then they were neither blotted out, destroyed, 
nor consumed. 

Josh. 11: 11, " And he took Hazor, and smote all the 
SOULS that were therein with the edge of the sword, 
utterly destroying them, there was not any left to 
breathe." Do immortal souls breathe, and can they be 
so utterly destroyed in a city, that none are left to 
breathe ? Who, unbiassed by his creed, after reading 
these texts, could believe that souls only left the body, 
and fled to another world ? Would the inspired writers 
have used such language, if the dogma of the immor- 
tality of the soul were true ? They teach the contrary 
of such doctrine in verse 14, and explain the meaning of 
the term soul. " The cattle, the children of Israel took 
for a prey unto themselves ; but every man they smote 
with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed 
them, neither left they any to breathe." Thus, then, 
inspiration evidently, and uniformly teaches, that souls 
are men, and can he destroyed. See also. Josh. 10 : 
28-39, " Joshua utterly destroyed all the souls, (per- 
sons,) that were in those cities ; aye, and destroyed 
these souls with the edge of the sword." Can the sword 
touch an intangible, immaterial ghost ? 

Ps. 40 : 14, " Let them be ashamed and confounded 
together, that seek after my soul to destroy ity Ps. 63 : , 
9, " But those who seek after my soul to destroy it^ 
shall go into the lower parts of the earth." (probabl£/ 
meaning the bottom of the grave.) Ezek. 22 : 25, 
" There is a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst 
thereof, like a roaring lion ravening the prey ; they 
have devoured souls ; they have made her many 


widows in the midst thereof." The widows of the 8oul», 
or persons, they had figuratively devoured. Verse 
27, " Her princes in the midst thereof are hke wolves 
ravening the prey, to shed blood, and to destroy souls, 
to get dishonest gain." See also^ Lev. 23 : 30 ; Prov. 
6 : 32 ; and Acts 3 : 23. *' And it shall come to pass 
that every {psuche,) soul^ which will not hear that 
prophet, {exolothreuthesetai ek tou laou) shall be utterly 
eo^^ermzTza^e^ out of the people." 

Here are thirty-four declarations, which plainly declare 
that souls are cut oJQT, devoured, destroyed with the 
sword, or by some corporeal- punishment, inflicting 
death and destruction : but not a word is said in any 
place what becomes of the body. If these souls were 
invisible and immortal ghosts, that could not be killed 
and destroyed by any corporeal destruction, but all had 
bodies that could, and were killed with such destruction, 
would it be consistent with the truth, for the inspired 
writers to tell us thirty-four times, that it was only the 
ghosts who were thus destroyed, when, in fact, it was 
only their bodies, and not their souls or ghosts at all ? 
Those who can beheve such glaring absurdities, can 
believe any thing that interested preachers, or corrupted 
tradition, may please to impose upon them. May the 
Lord deliver them. 

To the Devil and Satan is ascribed, Eev. 12:9, and 
20 : 3, the " deceiving the whole earth." But, in Eev. 
13 : 14, the Vatican and Moscoio MSS., which are the 
oldest and best, read, j^lana tons emous tous kai. It 
deceiveth my people. 

To the False Prophet, (the false propounder of the 
Gospel,) the beast that rose out of the sea, having seven 
heads and ten horns is ascribed, specially, ^''the deceiving 
mine, or my people ;" showing that the deceiving pro- 
pounders of false doctrines, are to be found within the 
pale of the professed Christian church : so also, Eev. 2 : 
20, " {Tous emous doulous,) to teach and seduce my 
servants y And, surely, they have been most miserably 
deluded ! 

Eeader ; will you sujBTer yourself to be thus deceived 
by these teachers of false doctrine, derived from an 
apostate Church ? Exert the faculties that God has 
given you and " try the spirits whether they be of God.'* 



This proposition is diametrically opposed to the im- 
mortal soul dogma. We shall first consider the nature 
of the penalty threatened for a breach of God's law. 
Gen. 2: 16, 17, " Of every tree of the garden, eatiyig 
thou shall eat /" translated, " thou mayest freely eat ;" 
but denoting a continuance of eating, and not a some- 
thing to be completed in a short time. " But of the 
tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not 
eat of it : {ki hium akalek memenu^ niuth temuth ;) for 
from (or after) [the] day of thy eating of it, dying, thou 
shalt die?'' Although the most frequent meaning of the 
h, prefixed to ium^vn hium, is in, yet this preposition has 
many other meanings, and it should always be translated 
in accordance with the context. Greenfield gives to h 
the following variety of meanings : " in, into ; on, upon, 
at, near ; concerning, out of, from ; after, according to ; 
with, by ; through ; to ; against ; among ; before ; for, 
on account of ; as ; when, while, since, because :" so 
that we are fully justified, by the context, in translating 
h, by from, after, or, on account of, as either of these 
agree with the context, while the word in does not 
agree. Some translate it after, and quote Num. 28 : 26, 
where it is prefixed to the word sebothikam, which is 
rendered " after your weeks ;" that is, your weeks hav- 
ing expired, " ye shall have a holy convocation." Sup- 
posing the prefix, b, to be rightly translated, in, it will 
make no diflference in the result, as the process com- 
menced on that very day ; but as the prefix b is suscep- 


tible of so great a variety of interpretations, we think 
that from J or after, would be most in accordance with 
the context. Muth temuth, " dying, thou shalt die," is 
a Hteral translation. Although in some cases a repeti- 
tion of the verb merely implies emphasis, yet, it likewise, 
as in the preceding verse, " eating, thou shalt eat," im- 
plies continuation, and here denotes a process, which 
God himself subsequently explains in Gen. 3: 17; 

" Because thou hast eaten of the tree cursed is 

the ground for thy sake ; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it 
all the days of thy life, {i. e., all the while the penalty is in 

V process till its completion,) .... in the sweat of thy face 
^halt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the grourul ; 

Jfor out of it wast thou taken : for dust thou art, and 
unto dust shalt thou return. And Jehovah of the 
Elohim said .... now, lest he put forth his hand, and 
take also of the tree of lives, and eat, and live for 
EVER :" God drove out the man, and guarded the tree 
of lives. Gen. 5:5, " And .... Adam lived .... nine 
hundred and thirty years, and he died." Thus we per- 
ceive that the penalty threatened was to end in death ; 
and God's interpretation of it plainly declared, that it 
would result in death, a gradual returning to the primi- 
tive elements of his being, the dust ; and the facts show 
that it did result in death, in the entire extinction of his 

■J being. And the Scriptures do not afford us a ray of 
hope that he will be raised to life again ; but declare 

^that all who will live for ever will owe their entire being 
to the first-born from the dead, with an incorruptible 
nature, a second Adam, and great head of all the living, 
who will impart " life and incorruptibility" to his 
followers only. 

Thus we perceive that the penalty was threatened to 
man as a unit, comprehended in the appellation "thou:" 
that it contemplated a gradual process, commencing in 
the day of transgression ; that in that day, the whole of 
the penalty was inflicted, by depriving man of the reno- 
vating effect of the tree of lives, which would have 
enabled him to live for ever, notwithstanding his mortal 
nature ; that this penalty was inflicted by subjecting man 
to the natural effect of his mortal nature, without a 
counteracting agent ; which subjection would necessarily 
result in death ; that the decaying or dying process was 


hastened, by cursing the ground, rendering it more 
sterile, and more productive of weeds, and causing an 
extra wear of the animal machinery by labor and anxiety ; 
and that Adam, as a unit^ did actually die^ and RE-turn 
to the ground out of which the whole of the man was 
made; the breath that God imparted not being hfe 
itself, but simply the means of animating the earthy man. 
If it be contended that the soul is the essential man, 
then it was the soul that w^as addressed by the term 
THOU, and then the soul suflfered the whole penalty and 
returned to its native earth. But if our readers are en- 
tangled in the snares of theologians, and with them say, 
man is composed of a soul that can live without a body, 
and a living body ; or, as some teach, that man has a 
" deathless spirit," an " immortal soul," and a living 
though mortal body, and therefore man is not one, but 
two or three ; then we ask, which of the three parts of 
man was addressed in the singular pronoun thou ? If 
our readers say it was the body that was addressed, then 
was the body only involved in the transgression ; and 
as no law was given to the soul or spirit, no penalty can 
be righteously inflicted upon either, and so soul and 
spirit necessarily escape, and all souls and spirits must 
then be for ever free from blame ! Upon your suppo- 
sition, the soul, that was chiefly guilty of the transgres- 
sion, escapes the infliction of the penalty ; and the body, 
that was constituted subservient to the soul, endures the 
whole penalty, which was death. Now if the soul was 
not meant in the penalty ^ tkov shall surely die^ then the 
soul was not meant in the prohibition^ (thou shalt not 
eat of it,) for these are the preceding words. But the 
thou in each case means the whole person ; for it would 
have been absurd to forbid a ghost to eat, or touch the 
fruit of a tree. It is plain, therefore, that no soul, or 
spirit, or ghost, that can live abstracted from the body, 
was involved in either the prohibition or the penalty ; 
and therefore no ghost sinned in the case, and no ghost 
fell. Why, therefore, do ye kindle the fires of endless 
misery, to torment the unfallen, sinless soul ? But if 
you will still contend, that Adam's ghost sinned, and 
that only his body died, then we say, that the " thou'^^ 
was addressed to the ghost, both in the threatening, and 
in the execution, and the twice repeated thou — " Dust 


thou art, and unto dust shalt tlwu return ;'' implies that 
the ghost addressed was made of dust, and returned 
again to dust. But the simple fact is, that the same 
man that became a hving creature, (soul or person,) in 
Gen. 2 : 7, is the very same living soul or creature, that 
was prohibited the tree of knowledge, and threatened in 
verse 17, and was the same living soul or person, that 
^/sinned and turned to dust ; " For the wages of sin is 
p/death," and not everlasting life in hell, or any other 
^place. Ezek. 18:4, " For the soul that sinneth, it shall 
die." Adam lies under the full infliction of the penalty, 
in the shape of dust, unconscious in the grave. He has 
already received the whole amount of the penalty, — ■ 
death — the extinction of conscious being; and if there 
should be no resurrection, then Adam will never be 
^/conscious again ; for all future life is dependent upon a 
/resurrection from the dead. But the resurrection is a 
part of a remedial system, introduced through Christ, at 
a subsequent period ; and is no way connected with the 
law that was given to Adam, which said, in effect, obey 
and live — ^transgress and die. Thus, then, the remedy 
' does not interfere with the infliction of the penalty of 
sin ; and " every transgression and disobedience receives 
its just recompense of reward," and " God is just, and 
yet the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus." He 
executes the full penalty, and yet "justifies the ungodhf^ 
who take hold of the hope set before them, of the resur- 
rection from the dead. 
' -^"That the penalty of the law is death, the extinction ot 
VJar^ing, is the uniform testimony of Scripture throughout 
the Bible ; though the devil and some preachers agree 
in contradicting God, by saying to souls, " Ye shall not 
surely die," in the only sense in w^hich death is threaten- 

/ed by God, the extinction of being, the " being as though 
they had not been." " Ye shall not surely die," was the 
^^erpent's first lie^ the lie by which he deceived Eve ; and 
every preacher, after having studied the subject, that still 
continues to preach the same dogma, for the sake of the 
loaves and fishes, and popularity, and' resists the truth, is 
giving currency to a lie that is sapping the very founda- 
tions of Christianity ; is countenancing and encouraging 
infidelity ; and is verily guilty in the sight of God. 
By comparing Ex. 31 : 14, 15, with Num. 15; 32-355 


you will plainly perceive that the soul that did any man- 
ner of work on the Sabbath — ^he was to be stoned to 
death by the people. So there is such a thing as a dead 
soul^ as we have proved and shall continue to prove. If 
Adam was a living soul, while the breath of hves was in 
his nostrils^ then he was a dead soul when he ceased to 
breathe the breath of lives. The very phrase " living 
soul," imphes a lifeless soul, and it would be superfluous 
to add living soul, if there were no such thing as a dead 
soul. And God is called the living God, to distinguish 
him from the dead gods, that can neither see, hear, nor 
talk. Ps. 115: 4-8. 
Job 3 : 20, 23, says — 

*' Why should light be vouchsafed to the miserable, 

And life (chayah) unto the bitter soul 1 (nephesh,) 

Who wait for death, but it comes not, 

And search for it more than for hidden treasures ; 

Who rejoice over a tumulus, 

And exult when they can find a grave." 

Here the bitter or distressed soul waits for death, 
which proves that it expected to die. The translators of 
the common version have officiously inserted an m between 
bitter and soul. Was this to disguise its meaning, and 
hide the death of the soul ? Job 7:15, My soul chooses 
strangling, death rather than life- Ah, Job, the pagan 
fable of the separate existence of the soul was not known 
and beUeved by thee, else thou wouldst not have sup- 
posed that thy soiil could be strangled ! ! Gen. 12 : 12- 
19. Here Abraham makes " me" and " my soul" iden- 
tical, and he and Sarah prevaricate some that his soul 
might live and not be killed by the Egyptians. In Gen. 
19: 17-20, Lot makes /, and my soul the same person, 
and said his soul should live^ if he fled out of Sodom to 
Zoar, which implied that his soul would have died in the 
destruction of Sodom if he had not fled. Ps. 78 : 50, 51, 
" He spared not their (nephesh) souls from death, but 
gave their {chayah) life over to the pestilence, and smote 
all the first born of Egypt." This proves that the souls 
of the first born of Egypt died with the pestilence. Pb. 
22 : 2, Deliver my soul from the sword, my soul from the 
hand of the dog. Can the sword reach the immaterial 
ghost ? Ps. 7:2," Lest he (a man) tear my soul like a 



lion, rending it in pieces.*' So this " simple, uncompound- 
ed, indivisible, immateriaP' soul^ can be separated, and 
torn in pieces. Job 18:4. " He teareth his soul in his an- 
ger." Here, as it were, to disguise the truth, the soulis 
translated himself. When the Philistines took David in 
Gath, and there unexpectedly saved his life, he exclaimed, 
Ps. 56 : 13, " Thou hast delivered my sotd from death?^ 
Ps. 116 : 8, reads the same. Jer. 38 : 17, " Thus saith 
the Lord. . .1^ thou wilt assuredly go forth unto the king 
of Babylon's princes, then thy soul shall live^ and this 
city shall not be burned with fire ; and thou shalt live^ 
and thy house." Here, " thou shalt live," and, "thy 
soul shall live," are synoyomous expressions. Job 24 : 
12, " Men groan from out of the city, and the soul of the 
wounded crieth out." If the soul be a ghost ^ then we 
may read Ez. 13 : 18-20 thus : " Wo to the women that 
sew pillows to all arm-holes, and make kerchiefs upon 
the head of every stature to hxmt gJiosts I Will ye hunt 
the ghosts of my people, and will ye save the ghosts alive 
that come unto you ? and will ye pollute me among my 
people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, to 
slay the ghosts that should not die^ and to save the ghosts 
alive that should not live^ by your lying to my people 
that hear your lies ? Wherefore thus saith the Lord 
God ; Behold I am against your pillow^s, wherewith ye 
there hunt the ghosts to make them fly, and I will tear 
them from your arms, and will let the gJwsts go, even the 
ghosts that ye hunt to make them fly." What an ab- 
surdity is this ; here nephesh occurs eight times, and is 
Jdlled and saved alive ; and if nephesh ever means an 
immortal soul, or ghost, surely the translators should 
have know^n better than to translate it by the word soul^ 
in any of these places. In Jer. 2 : 34. " Also in thy 
skirts is found the blood of the souls of the poor inno- 
cents." As the souls have blood to shed, it must be the 
persons themselves. So John in Rev. 6 : 9, saw in vision un- 
der the altar, the souls (or persons) that were slain for 
the word of God, and their cry was, hke the cry of the 
blood of righteous Abel, How long dost thou not judge 
and avenge our blood, our death, on them that dwell 
upon the earth? But these souls were persons who had 
blood which was shed, and the murder of them is charged 
upon the dwellers upon the earth. Oould the death of 


never-dying souls be consistently charged upon the mur- 
derers of souls ? Eev. 16:3," And every living soul died 
in the sea." We suppose the souls were the ghosts of 
the fishes ; yea, we mean the fishes themselves; for it 
was the result of the water becoming blood. And per- 
haps so thought the translators, for in Isa. 19 : 10, they 
have rendered the word nephesh, fish. In the mar- 
gin they say, '^ living things^ Why did they hide the 
word souls ? They knew that the word nephesh^ when 
plural, meant simply creatures, whether dead or alive 
whether fish or men. You may read also Jer. 4:10 
Num. 1 1 ; 6 ; Job 10 : 1 ; 30 : 15, 16 ; Ps. 19 : 13 ; 31 
9 ; 33 : 19 ; 86 : 13, 14 ; 1 19 : 20, 25, 28 ; Isa. 55 : 3, 5 
Jer. 4:31; Ez. 18 : 4, 20, 27 ; 33 : 5, 9. Here are forty^ 
two texts in which iiephesh and psuche^ are rendered soul. 
And thus it is evident that the translators knew that soul 
meant creature or person in these places, and if in these, 
80 in all others. 


The following passages place the soul in the hand or 
power of the grave. In Ps. 49 : 8, 9, our version reads, 
" For the redemption of the soul is precious, and it 
ceaseth for ever : that he should still live for ever, and 
not see corruption." Let us put the construction upon 
it the Hebrew requires. Verse 7, " None of those (that 
trust in their wealth) can by any means redeem his bro- 
ther (from the grave,) nor give to God a ransom for him. 
For the redemption of his soul (from the grave) is pre- 
cious, but such a redemption ceaseth for ever : that he 
(his soul) should still live for ever and not see corruption." 
Such a redemption from the grave was never provided 
for man ; the sentence dust thou art and unto dust shalt 
thou return, passes upon all men, and their souls see cor- 
ruption, yea the soul enters the house appointed for all 
the living. That the soul experiences corruption is like- 
wise evident from verse 14. ^'' Like sheep they are laid 
in the grave ; death shall feed on them ; and the upright 
shall have dominion over them in the morning (of the 
resurrection;) and their beauty shall consume in the 
grave from their dwelHng. But Grod will redeem my 
soul from the power of the grave (from the hand of 


sheol:) for he shall receive mey Ps. 89: 48, " What 
man is he that liveth, and shall not see death ? shall he 
dehver his soul from the hand of the grave ?" The 
question imphes an impossibihty. In Job 33 : 18-21, we 
have a description of a dying man. (God) " keepeth back 
his {nephesh) soul from the {shakhath) pit, or grave, and 
his [chayah) life from perishing by the sword. He is 
chastened also with pain upon his bed (and the racking 
of his bones is incessant :) so that his {chayah) life abhor- 
reth bread, and his {nephesh) soul dainty food ;....yea, his 
{nephesh) soul draw^eth nigh unto {kever) t\\Q grave^ and 
his (chayah) life to the destroyer or to the (mimtheem) 
mortal diseases.'''' Jer. 16 : 4 ; Ezk. 18 : 8, illustrate this. 
But the man is unexpectedly restored to health again. 
Verse 23, " If there be a messenger with him, an inter- 
preter, one among a thousand, to point out to man his 
right course: then he is gracious unto him and saith, 
Deliver him from going down to the {shokhath) pit : I 
have found a ransom. His flesh shall be fresher than a 
child's : he shall return to the days of his youth.... Verse 
28, He will redeem his soul from going into the {shok- 
hath) pit, and his hfe shall appear in the light [a little 
longer]. Lo, all these things worketh God oftentimes 
with man, to bring back his {nephesh) soul from the pit, 
to be enlightened with the light of the livingy The 
word shokhath seems to imply destruction in a deep" pit, 
or gi'ave. Here the soul is represented as being liable 
to destruction in the grave, and to deliver him from the 
grave, and to deliver his soul from the grave are equiva- 
lent expressions. Moreover we find the difference be- 
tween kevei' and sheol : certain souls are buried in the 
kever ^ or grave ; all souls are not buried in graves ; but 
all souls go into sheol^ the state of death. So was the 
soul of Hezekiah delivered. Isa. 38 : 17, " Thou hast in 
love to my soul delivered k from {shokhath) the pit of 
corruption." This is equal to saying thou hast delivered 
my soul from being destroyed in the grave by corruption. 
So in Jonah 2: 2, 6, 7, '' Out of the belly of {sheol) the 
grave [translated hell\ cried I, and thou heardest my 
voice :...thou hast brought up my life from corruption, 
O Lord, my God : When my soul fainted within me."... 
In the same sense was the soul of David, or David hi7n- 
^dfy for they are one, often snatched from the grave. See 

Christ's soul died. 69 

Ps. 30 : 2, 3 ; 31 : 9, 10 ; 88 : 3 ; 9:17; 33 : 19 ; 37 : 7. 
Likewise see Jer. 18:20. Job says, 24: 19; 30:23, 
" The graves consume all that have sinned. I know that \/^ 
thou wilt bring me to death, and to the house appointed i^"^^ 
for all the living." If the soul sinSy or the soul lives j then K 
will it be consumed in the grave. Is. 10 : 17, 18, " And 
the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One 
for a flame : and it shall burn and devour his thorns and 
his briers in one day ; and shall consume the glory of 
his forest, and of his fruitful field, both soul and body, or 
from the soul even to the flesh." The wicked as thorns 
and briers are burned up, their lives and being, are des- 
troyed. We have referred you to sixty texts where the 
soul and life are destroyed, or liable to be destroyed in 
the grave. But if soul and Hfe be an undying ghost, 
then are these expressions extreme absurdities ; and there- 
fore the nephesh and the chayah always refer to the per- 
sons themselves as a unit. 


Let us reverently consider the import of the expres- 
sion; '' Christ poured out his soul unto death :" for if ye 
believe not that Chrif^ died, and rose again, " Ye are yet 
in your sins" ; and of course will die, and remain under 
the dominion of death in utter unconsciousness for ever! 
1 Cor. 15. Can a believer in the immortality of the soul, 
believe that Christ died ? He may affirm it ; but he 
does not believe it. Ask him. Did Christ die? " Yes." 
Did his soul die ? " Why — ^yes, his soul was made an 
offering for sin." No prevarication, sir, Did the Holy One, 
Jesus Christ himself, die ? " Certainly not ; his body 
died, but his soul went to Paradise ; for if Christ him- 
self had died, the universe would have fallen to pieces" ! ! 
Then you do not believe that God gave his Son to die, 
but only a body that was an encumbrance to the soul, 
and Jesus was not raised again from the dead, but only 
his body ! ! Alas ! alas! for orthodoxy ! ! 1 Thess. 4:14, 
" If we believe that Christ died, and rose again ; even so 
also, through Jesus, will God bring with Jesus [from the 
dead all] them that sleep in himy Heb. 13: 20, But 
may — ^' The God of peace, that brought again from the 
dead our Lord JesuSy that great shepherd of the sheep, 


through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you 
perfect in every good work to do his will." 

1 Thess. 5:9," For God hath not appointed us to 
wrath, but to the acquisition of life, by our Lord Jesus 
the Messiah ; who died for us, that whether we wake or 
sleep, we might hve together with him." Col. 3 : 3, 
" For ye are dead [that is, subject to death ;] and your 
life is hidden with the Messiah in God : and when the 
Messiah, who is our source of life^ shall be manifested, 
THEN shall ye also be manifested with him in glory." 

This last we quote from Murdock's translation of the 
Syriac, which is the oldest version extant, and which is 
very much like the language the Saviour himself used, 
which was the Chaldee Syriac. The words save and 
salvation^ are nearly in all cases throughout the Syriac 
expressed by words which signify " to live," and " have 
life," which expressions harmonize throughout, proving 
an identity of meaning. 

Isa. 53 : 10, " When thou shalt make his soul an offer- 
ing for sin." His soul could not have been made an 
offering for sin unless it were slain as the types were. 
See Lev. 1 : 4-15. Every animal that was brought for 
an offering, was slain at the altar before the Lord. Gen. 
22 : 2, God said to Abraham, " Take now thy son, thy 
only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the 
land of Moriah, and offer him there for a burnt offering 
upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of... 
And Abraham... bound Isaac, his son, and laid him on the 
altar.. .and took the knife to slay his son." But no, Abra- 
ham ; " God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt of- 
fering,.. Audi Abraham went and took the ram, and offer- 
ed him up for a burnt offering instead of his son." Isa. 
53 : 11, " He shall see of the travail of his soul.''^ Isa. 
53 : 12, "Because he hath poured out Ins soul unto deaths 
In the face of this plain declaration, who shall dare to 
tell us that the soul of Christ did not die ? We believe 
the Bible, and we find it plainly recorded. Mat. 26 : 38, 
Mark 14 : 34, " My soul is exceedingly sorrowful (how 
much ?) even unto death.'' Mat. 20 : 28, Mark 10 : 45, 
" Even as the Son of Man came, not to be ministered 
unto, but to minister, and to give his (psuche) soul a ran- 
som for many." John 10 : 10, " I am come that they might 
have zoen^ hfe, and that they might have it more abun- 

Christ's soul died. 71 

dantly." Verse 11, '*The good shepherd giveth his 
psiiche^ soul^ for the sheep." 15 v, '' I lay down mj 
psuche^ soul, for the sheep." Verse 17, 18, '' Therefore 
doth my Father love me, because I lay down mypsucke, 
my life, my being, that I might take it again. No man 
taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself I have 
power to lay it down, and I have powder to take it again." 
15 : 13, " Greater love hath no man than this, that a man 
lay dow^n his psuche, his hfe, or being for his friends." 
Thus the words of Christ correspond w^ith the prophet in 
that important truth. That his soul w^as made a legal 
oftering for sin. 

John sets his seal to this truth, 1 John 3 : 16, " In this 
we recognize his love, because he laid down his psuche, 
soul, or being, for us ; and w^e ought to lay down our 
psuchcj souls, or being, for the brethren." Do any say 
thsit psuche means life in these places ? We affirm that 
it only means life as being the essential attribute of the 
soul, without which the soul is dead, and is worthless. 
In the corresponding places in Luke, who wrote in purer 
Greek, and avioided these Hebrew idioms, in the place of 
psuche^ he writes, Christ gave himself. 

Acts 3 : 15, " Ye killed the archeyon tes zoes^ author 
of life, whom God hath raised from the dead." Killed 
the origin of the everlasting life of the saints. Does not 
this text prove that something more than a body^ or even 
of a man merely, was killed and raised again from the 
dead? 1 Pet. 3 : 18, " Christ was put to death in the 
flesh." Observe, it does not read that the flesh was put 
to death, which is also true; but Christ was put to 
death, as partaking of a corruptible nature, but was 
raised an illustration or a pattern of the life and incorrup- 
tion which is the main hope of the gospel ; see 2 Tim. 1 : 
10. Eead Eph. 4:10, " He that descended^ is the same 
that ascended up far above all the heavens (or atmos- 
pheres,) that he might fill all things." Verse 9, " He 
first descended into the lower parts of the earth?'' Though 
the lower parts of the earth may sometimes mean sea- 
coasts and valleys, as in Isa. 44 : 23, and the mother's 
womb, as Ps. 139 : 15 ; or perhaps the mother earthy yet 
the phrase sometimes means the state of the dead, or 
grave, as in Ps. 63 : 9, and Eph. 4 : 9. And whereas 
David, Peter and Paul all declare that Jesus did descend 


into the grave, if you deny that the soul of Christ first 
descended into the lower parts of the earthy or the grave^ 
then to be consistent, you must hkewise deny, that the 
soul of Christ ascended ; for the same soul or person that 
ascended, ^7*5^ descended: so what of Christ descended* 
the same only ascended. 

But that Christ himself, yea the soul of Christ, de- 
scended into the grave is evident from many passages of 
Scripture. Ps. 16:9, " My flesh also shall rest in hope. 
For thou wilt not leave my soul^ in sheol^ [the grave^ or 
state of the dead ;] neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy 
One to see corruption." [But] " thou wilt show me the 
path of life." In Acts 2: 26, Peter, commenting upon 
this passage, tells us that David spake this of Christ, 
quoting his very words, " Moreover also my flesh shall 
rest in hope : because thou wilt not leave my soul in 
hades ^ (the grave, or state of the dead ;) neither wilt thou 
suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast 
made known to me the ways of Hfe." Evidently imply- 
ing that the only way to obtain permanent life was to be 
raised again from the dead with an incorruptible and 
therefore an immortal nature. Peter goes on and com- 
pares and contrasts the death of David with the death of 
Christ. Verse 29, " The patriarch David, [equal to the 
soul of David,] is both dead and buried, and his sepul- 
chre is with us to this day" ; implying that you may see 
for yourselves, that David himself is still in his grave. 
Verse 34, '^ For David is not ascended into the heavens." 
Verse 30, " Therefore.. ..knowing that God. ...would raise 
up Christ to sit on his throne ; he seeing this before, 
spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not 
left in hades ^ neither his flesh did see corruption. This 
Jesus hath God raised up." Verse 36, " Let all.. .know 
assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom 
ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." Paul comments 
further on David's expressions : Acts 13 : 28, " Though 
they found no cause of death [in Christ,] yet they desired 
Pilate that he should be slain. And when they had fulfill- 
ed all that was written of him^ they took him down from 
the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre. But God raised 
him from the dead." He declared that God had fulfilled 
the promise made to the fathers and " hath raised up 
Jestcs again ; as it is written in the second Psalm, Thou 


art my son, this day have I begotten thee" [from the 
dead]. " And as concerning that he raided him up from 
the deadj now no more to return [to a corruptible &tat«;] 
he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of 
David. Wherefore he saith also in another* psalm, 
'^'Thoushalt not suffer thine ^o/y ^^^to see corruption.' 
For David, after he had served his ow^n generation by 
the will of God, fell on slee^^ and saw corrugation ,* but 
HE whom God raised again saw no corruption." Now 
mark tw^o points ; both Christ and David died ; and both 
were buried in the grave ; but while the soul of David, 
or David himself, is sleeping in the grave in a state of 
corruption, waiting for Christ to descend again 6x)m hea- 
ven, to wake the dead -, the soul of Christ, or Christ him- 
self, was raised from the dead. But for this, the soul of 
Ohrist, w^hich David makes to be the same as the Holy 
One, or himself, would have experienced corruption. If 
the reader does not plainly perceive this, he has reason 
to suspect that the veil of tradition has beclouded his 

The apostles make the sheol of the Old Testament 
to correspond with the hades of the New : both meaning 
the grave^ or the state of death. The grave being a particu- 
lar expression ^ the state of death a general one. Some 
souls are placed in graves, while all souls go to sheol or 
hades^ the state of death. The souls of both righteous 
snd wicked go to sheol. Dare the learned deny that 
sheol is thirty times translated the -grave ? The Scrip- 
tures say, Ecc. 9 : 10, ^^ There is no woi'k, nor device, 
nor wisdom, in sheol ^ whither thou goest." Here sheol 
is justly rendered grofce ; but in Ps. 16, and Acts 2, 
sheol and hades^ are shamefully rendered hell ; a word 
til at, as it is now understood, completely obscures the 
true meaning 1 ! Was this done to hide the fact that the 
soul of Christ died^ and entered the grave ? The idea of 
placing the soul of Christ in the hell, that has the cur- 
rent theological definition attached to it, if it be done 
wilfully, is consummate blasphemy i ! As the apostles 
leave the soul of David in sheol^ or hades^ therefore, ac- 
cording to current theology, the pious patriarch is still 
in a hell of fire ! ! But th« Popish priests, sanctioned by 
Protestant orthodoxy, had invented the dogma of the 
separate existence of the soul, and consequently must 


find places to put them. Hence, the inventioB of tbe 
Popish hell, and hmbo, and purgatory, and a fabled 
place called heaven ; and hkewi&e the Protestant " hell/' 
and the poetical "spirit land," and a heaven "beyond 
the bounds of time and space" ! ! Full well do ye follow 
the traditions of your fathers. Well may you call the 
Church of Eome, the mother church ; and by following 
her cunningly devised fables, too truly do ye prove your- 
selves to be the legitimate daughters of the mother ot 
harlots ! ! ! The false prophets, or the false propounders 
of doctrine, that should deceive God's people. 

While some disdain the Bible truths that the soul of 
Christ was " poured out unto death^'' they startle not at 
the idea of pouring his soul into a hell of fire ! Never- 
theless, the Spirit has said expressly, that " his soul was 
made an offering for sin," " his soul was exceedingly 
sorrowful, even unto death." It is the death of the soul 
of Christ, or of Christ himself^ that was the ransom price 
for the redemption of the souls of men, and the means 
of reconciling our souls to God. For says Christ, " / 
am he that was dead^ and am alive, and behold I live 
for evermore." If the soul of Christ did not die, then, 
are the souls of all men left without a propitiatory sacri- 
fice ; for the law demanded nepheshfor nephesh^ soul for 
soul^ eye for eye, hand for hand ;" Deut. 19 : 21. Why 
did inspiration use the word soul of Christ, if the body 
only, separated from the essential mind and still living 
principle, or soul, was really meant ? The Vulgate 
reads, 1 John 4:3, " Every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, 
is not of God." Dissolveth Jesus — ^but ye separate him 
into four or five parts during his stay in the grave 
Some of you say, that, L a part of Jesus remained alive, 
superintending the machinery of the universe : 2. a part 
of Jesus went ahve with the thief into Paradise : 3. a 
part of Jesus went alive into hell, and preached to the 
prisoners there : while, 4. another part, the body, lay 
unconscious in the tomb. Some others might add, 5. 
that the spirit of Jesus, as a living entity, went to his 
Father in heaven. Thus you dissolve Jesus, and sepa- 
rate him into four or five parts ; and if this were so, 
the Apostle, instead of sapng that Christ diedj should 
mend his expression, and say, that one part only out of 
four, and that the least valuable part, died. Away with 

Christ's soul died. 75 

such manifest perversions of Scripture and common 
sense. Foolish men, who hath bewitched you that ye 
should not receive the truth, that Jesus Christ has been 
evidently set forth as crucified among you ? Not a 
part only crucified, but Christ died, and Christ was 
buried^ and Christ was raised, 


We intend that the following texts shall form a sort 
of top-stone, binding together, and crowning our pre- 
ceding arguments. They will conclusively prove that 
the boasted " immortal soul," is but a mortal thing aftei 
all ; meaning only the person himself, or his essential 
part, his life. Gren. 9 : 4-6, " But flesh, with the neph- 
esh, soul, thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not 
eat. And surely your blood of your nephesh^ souls, will 
I require : at the hand of every beast will 1 require it, 
and at the hand of man ; at the hand of every man's 
brother will I require the nephesh^ soul, of man. Whoso 
sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." 
Readers of the Bible know that the shedding of blood 
signifies death, and murder ; as in 1 Kings 2 : 33, 37 ; 2 
Sam. 1:16; 3:27,28; 4:11; 16:8. The blood of 
your souls, must mean the murder of your souls. Surely 
the beasts could not shed the blood of an immaterial, 
immortal soul ! This, then, speaks of the death of the 
poor "immortal" soul, as the penalty is nephesh for 
nephesh. Will you send the soul of the beast to endure 
the fires of eternal torments, for following the instincts 
of his nature ? We might ask if Moses knew that the 
nephesh meant a ghost, that was not tangible, and had 
no blood, why did he not use the terms chay^ and chay- 
ah^ or chayim, for the hfe of the body, if he meant any 
such thing ? for he uses these terms to express life, &c. 
in hundreds of other places. Why use the term nephesh 
to express the body, or person, when he could have used 
nine other words that would have expressed a dead 
body, besides the term soul, viz. : ish, pena, peger, nehe- 
lar^ geveyah, heheyah, shear, adam, face, all of which arc 
translated a man, and person, and are applied to dead 
bodies ? See Jud. 9 : 5, 18 ; 20: 39 ; 2 Kings 10 : 7 ; 


Gen. 2 : 23 ; Job 32 : 21 ; Jer. 33 : 5 ; 31 : 40 ; 41:9; 
Isa. 37 : 36 ; Deut. 1:17; 21: 23 ; Jer. 26 : 23 ; 34 : 20 ; 

16 : 4, 18 ; 36: 30 ; 1 Sam. 31 : 12 ; Neh. 8 : 3; 2 Kings 
8:5; Prov. 5 : 11 ; Ezek. 44 : 25 ; 2 Sam. 17: 11. As, 
then, there was no want of words, why do the Scriptures 
say meth nephesh^ dead soul, if only the body without 
the soul was intended, and the soul is an immaterial 
living ghost, apart from the body ? For all these 
words mean a man, person, body, or carcase. Now, if 
nephesh ever meant an immortal, immaterial soul, Moses 
would not have apphed that term to the material man ; 
and especially the phrase, me^/t nephesh^ dead soul, would 
never occur. 

We will now present nine cases, where the translators, 
apparently to hide the death of the soul, have translated 
a killed or murdered soul^ a person. We will here call 
the nephesh^ sl ghost, to show its absurdity. Num. 31 : 
19, ^' Whosoever hath killed any ghost, (rendered per- 
son,) and whosoever hath touched any slain, purify your- 
selves." 35 : 11, " Then shall ye appoint your cities of 
refuge for you, that the slayer may flee thither, which 
killeth any ghost by error ;" translated, that killeth any 
person at unawares. Ver. 15, " That every one that 
killeth any ghost at unawares, may flee thither." Ver. 
30, '^ Whoso killeth any ghost, the murderer shall be put 
to death." Deut. 27 : 25, '' Cursed be he that taketh a 
reward to slay an innocent ghost. ''^ Josh. 20 : 3, " That 
the slayer that killeth any ghost unawares, may flee 
thither." Yer. 9, reads the same. 1 Sam. 22 : 22 ; 
" I have occasioned the death of all the ghosts of thy 
father's house ;" and, Prov. 28 : 17, "A man that doth 
violence to the blood of any ghost, shall flee to the pit ; 
let no man stay him." But if it be absurd in any of 
these texts, to translate the word nephesh, by a word 
that indicates a soul that can live apart from the body, 
or a ghost, why does inspiration use the term neph- 
esh, in preference to so many others, when only the 
person was evidently intended ? But in those days the 
Pagan fable of the immortal soul was not in vogue. 

We will now furnish you with nine cases, where to 
hide the death of the soul, meth nephesh, dead soul, is 
rendered, in every case, '^ a dead body." Numb. 9 : 10, 
"If any man of you, or of your posterity, shall be 


unclean, by reason of a meth nephesh^ a dead soul.'' Lev. 
21 : 11, *' Neither shall ye go into any meth nephesh^ 
dead soul^ Num. 6:6, " All the days that he sepa- 
rateth himself unto the Lord, he shall come at no fneth 
nephesh^ dead souiy 19 : 16, " Whosoever toucheth one 
that is slain with the sword in the open field, or a meth 
nephesh^ dead soul^ or a hone of a nephesh^ souiy 2 Chron. 
20 : 24, " And behold, they were all meth nephesh, dead 
souls, fallen to the earth." Verse 25, " They found 
among them in abundance both riches, with the meth 
nephesh^ dead souls ^ and precious jewels." Ps. 97 : 2, 
" The meth nephesh^ dead souls ^ of thy servants have 
they given to be meat unto the fowls of the heaven." 
Ps. 110 : 6, ''He shall judge among the heathen, he shall 
fill the places with the meth nephesh, dead souls." Hag. 
2 : 13, " If one that is unclean by a meth nephesh^ dead 
soul," &c. These sacred writers would have been 
turned out of our modern popular churches, if they had 
therein affirmed that the fancied " immortal souls" had 
blood and bones, and died ; and absolutely became so 
corrupt and abominable, as to render the person touch 
ing them unfit for the service of God till purified, yeaj 
even after he had washed his clothes. 

We will now present you four texts, where the meth 
nephesh^ dead soul of a man, is rendered a dead body of a 
man. Numb. 13 : 1 1, '* He that toucheth the meth neph- 
esh^ dead soul, of any man, shall be unclean seven days." 
Here the margin skulks around the truth, and reads, the 
" dead body of any soul of man." Numb. 9 : 6, " And 
there were certain men who were defiled by the meth 
nephesh^ the dead soul of a man, and they could not 
keep the passover on that day." Ver. 7, " And those 
men said unto him, we are defiled by the meth nephesh^ 
dead soul of a man." Num. 19 : 13, " Whosoever 
toucheth the meth nephesh^ the dead soul^ of any man 
that is dead." Observe the phraseology here. The 
man may have a dead soul, but that dead soul is not an 
abstraction, it is the man, himself, that is dead ; and the 
man has no " immortal" or " never-dying" soul, or 
*' deathless spirit," that has escaped the death of him- 
self How will any dare attempt to reconcile these 
passages with the current theology ? Your complaisant 
translators have covered them up, to save you the pains ! 


Will you say a man has two souls — the one that can 
die, and the other that is " never-dying ?" 

Here we might rest our proofs, that a living nephesh 
is a living maUy and a dead nephesh is a dead man^ or 
a dead body : but, we have not yet done. We wish to 
bury the immortal soul fable beneath such a burden of 
plain facts, that it will never have a resurrection. The 
succeeding texts as plainly teach the death of the soul, 
as do the preceding. Observe, where w^e write soul^ the 
Hebrew w^ord is nephesh. Lev. 24 : 17, " He that 
smiteth the soul of a man, shall surely be put to death ; 
and he that killeth a beast shall make it good, soul for 
souV Deut. 19 : 6, " Lest the avenger .... overtake 
him, because the way is long, and smite him in soul ;" 
rendered, " slay him." Ver. 1 1, " But, if any man hate 
his neighbor, and lie in wait for him, and rise up against 
him, and smite him in soul ;" rendered, " smite him 
mortally that he die." This is evidence that the 
translators knew that, to smite in soul was to kill, 
or murder the man. Compare 2 Kings 25 : 25, with 
the margin of Jer. 40 : 14, where Gedaliah was 
smitten in soul, so that he died. Jud. 5 : 18, '* Zebulun 
and ISTaphtah were a people that endangered their souls 
unto the death in the high places of the field [of battle.]" 
Josh. 2 : 14, " And the men answered her, our send 
instead of you to die," &c. 2 Sam. 14 : 14, " For we 
must needs die, neither doth God respect any soul from 
death." Job 31 ; 39, " If I have eaten the fruits thereof 
without money, or caused the soul of the owners thereof 
to expired Job 36 : 14, " Their nephesh^ soul^ dieth in 
youth, and their chayah^ life^'m among the unclean." Num. 
23 : 10, " Let my soul die the death of the righteous^ and 
let my last end be like his." This, Hke Ps. 97 : 2, 
declares that the souls of the righteous^ die. Judg. 16 : 
30, '' Let my soul die with the PhiHstines." Acts 5:15, 
" And Ananias, hearing these words, fell down, and 
exepsuxe^'^ (his soul expired,) is rendered, " gave up the 
ghost." Rev. 16 : 3, " And every psuche zosa apetha- 
nen^ hving soul died in the sea." Matt. 2 : 20, " They 
are dead that sought the psiiche^ soul^ of the child." 
Matt. 10 : 39, '' He that findeth his psuche^ soul, shall 
lose it ; and he that loseth his psuche, soul, for my sake, 
shall find it." An objector may say that soul, here, 


meaits life ; 'but we say it means " himself''^ and no man 
loses himself till he loses his life. See also, Mark 3 : 4 
8 : 35 • Luke 6; 9; 9: 56; 14: 26; 17: 33 ; John 12 
25 ; 13 : 37, 38 ; Acts 15 : 26 ; 27 : 10, 22; Eool 11:3 
PhiL 2: 30 ; 1 John 3:16; Eev, 12 : 10. All these 
places plaifily declare that the psitche^ the 8oul^ can be 
murdered, or lost in death for Christ's sake ; and that it 
lies down in death. 

Here, then, are sixty places in this catalogue of dead 
souls, where the translators could not call nephesh and 
psuche a :soid^ except in a few places in the margin ; for 
the manifest contradiction in the expression, dead i??i' 
mortal soul^ has compelled them to throw away the 
Hebrew idiom, and justly translate the soul^ a man, a 
person, the body, they, him, me, fish, a beast, or life, in 
;all these «ixty places. So that nephesh and psiiche^ even 
in the estimation of the learned that sustain the popular 
theory, mean the creature, or person, himself 


We fully admit that the preceding sixty texts are just- 
ly translated ; but the fraud consists in translating the 
identical words, where they would favor the Pagan no- 
tion of immortality, in such a manner as to cover up the 
mortality of the soul, and favor the belief <bi its conscious 
separate existence. In three hundred and ten places, 
where this could not be done, the translators have called 
the soul something else, so as to conceal the truth. Had 
they been as honest, as they have shown themselves 
terafty, they would have rendered nephesh and psuche^ 
«oal every time, or have given the words untranslated, 
or in every case where the words occur^ have given in 
their Btea-d -a uniform synonym, or 6uch other term as 
would, in every case, have exactly conveyed the idea of 
the original In Num, 23 : 10, and Jud. 16 : 30; to con- 
ceal the death of the soul, the translators have left out 
the word and added ^' mey ^ Let my soul die," was the 
prayer of the two, and should have been in the text. 
Now, if they believed in the separate conscious existence 
of the soul, they must have Been that these two plaees 
lalone^ were conclusive proof that such -eoul must die, 


and evidently to hide which they have left out the word 
soul that would have clearly manifested the truth, and 
inserted other words that completely obscure the truth 
respecting the nature of the soul. So in Genesis, where- 
the word ncphcsh and chayiah nephesh are applied to 
beasts, and reptiles, they are studiously concealed in the- 
translation ; but when the same terms apply to man, they 
are so translated as to advance and eujcourage the 
" pious (?) fraud'' I 

A recourse to the laws of figurative language will not 
help our opponents. "We can admit that the flesh and 
body are used in two hundred and six places to repre- 
sent the whole creature or person ; that is, the soul, as- 
defined by Scripture- But the soul as constituting the? 
whole being can never be used to express only a part. 
That is, the terms, nephe&h and psiiche^ comprehending 
the whole man or creature ; or even, as in the estimation 
of current theology, as constituting the most important 
part of man, what is essential to his being ; these terms^. 
w^e say, can never represent the body only, in the sense 
of the body being less than the soul. The greater term 
is never used as a type of the lesser term. Examples : 
The eyes are appropriately used in one hundi*ed and 
ninety places to represent the mind, but the mind is 
never used to represent the eyes. The hand two hun- 
dred times represents power, but power never represents 
the hand. The earth is used one hundred and forty-six 
times to represent the people upon it ; house two hun- 
dred and seventy-five times for the family in it ; seven- 
teen times for the church, but never is this order rever- 
sed. In more than eight hundred places the heart is 
used to represent the intelligent and moral creature, the 
soul ; but never is the term soul used to represent only 
the fleshly organ of the heart. Now to apply this argu- 
ment, the terms neiyliesh^ and psuche^ the only words 
translated soul^. are used in sixty places in such a man- 
ner that our opponents are obhged to confess that they 
mean only the body, or person, or creature \ therefore, 
as the greater is never used to represent the less, the 
soul, the creature, the body^ the person himself, equally 
express the same thing. A dead body is a dead soul ^ 
and a dead soul is a dead body. The very term living 
soul, or living creature, implies that there may be dead 

/7^ Of*' TH ^ 

HEBREW IDIOMS. J|TT *"^ gf "^ ^^ "^* 

souls. We have presented thirteen places wReife tho 
term soul not only means the body, but is the very body 
itself, and is so translated. Besides this, we have pre- 
sented five hundred and ninety-seven other places where 
the terms nephesh and psuche^ does not mean, even in 
the estimation of our opponents, an abstract soul, that 
can separately exist, but where the terms evidently mean 
animal life, and the creature himself, both of man and 
beast. From the peculiar structure of the Hebrew 
idiom, the term soul is used instead of the reflective pro- 
nouns ; and in such a manner, that in two hundred places 
an unfaithful interpreter — ^biased by a Pagan theory, 
early imbibed, carefully fostered, and sustained by popu- 
lar prejudice — can put such a construction upon plain 
language as to assume that, because the soul is separately 
spoken of, therefore the soul must be a separate thing. 
"We say, we have quoted six hundred and ten places, 
where the soul evidently means the man, or beast ; and 
no other construction can possibly be forced upon these 
places ; therefore the inference is irresistible, that in the 
other two hundred places, where it is not asserted that 
the soul is a separate thing from the man, although 
separately mentioned, it must necessarily mean in these 
places the same as in the other six hundred and ten 
places, that the soul is the man himself 

We will give an illustration. Luke 1 : 46, " Mary 
said, My soid doth magnify the Lord^ and my spirit hath 
rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the 
low estate of his harulmaiden?'' In this short specimen 
of the Hebrew poetic idiom, we have six persons, ox 
things, separately spoken of as acting, or capable of act- 
ing. Mary said : the soul magnified : the spirit rejoiced , 
and the handmaiden /(^/^ regarded. Besides we have two 
other persons, the Lord, and God my Saviour. Yet the 
two last are comprehended in the singular pronoun Ae, 
which designates them as one, and the/o^^r others, are 
all included in the singular pronoun me, in the next line ; 
and of course mean but one person : for Mary continued 
to say, " For, lo, from henceforth, all generations shall 
call ME blessed." Now it would be just as logical to say, 
that Mary, her soul, her spirit, and the handmaiden, 
were four separate persons^ that could live separately, 
distinctly, and independently of each other — or two per- 


sons and two ghosts — as to say the soul, or the spirit 
could Hve apart from Mary herself, or even from her 

We give another illustration of the Hebrew idiom. 
Acts 2 : 25, " David speaketh....! foresaw the Lord al- 
ways before my face.... therefore did my heart rejoice, 
and my tongue was glad ; moreover also my flesh shall 
rest in hope : because thou wilt not leave my soul in 
hades, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see 
corruption." The record of David, speaking in the per- 
son of another says : 1,1 foresaw ; 2, my heart rejoiced ; 
3, my tongue was glad ; and 4, xny flesh hoped ; because 
God would not leave, 5, my soul in the state of death, 
nor suffer, 6, his Holy One to see corruption" : [But 
would give to Christ an early resurrection.] Because 
the attributes of mind are here applied to different parts 
of the man, shall we say that there are six separate, inde- 
pendent entities spoken of here, and rashly conclude that 
the heart, and tongue, and flesh, and soul, and Holy One 
are not identical with the " I" ? and can live separately 
from the " I" ? especially, too, as the soul is represented 
as being in the state of death, and the Holy One liable to 
corruption, if left in that state ? But it would be just as 
reasonable to infer all this, as to infer that the soul or 
spirit, in consequence of similar phraseology, could live 
separately from the body or the man ! But even could 
our opponents clearly prove that the soul could exist in 
a conscious state separately from the body, which the 
Scripture calls the man, which is utterly impossible, even 
then, the soul could not be proved immortal. For there 
stand our three hundred and fifty texts showing that the 
soul can be killed and destroyed ; and we shall present 
hundreds of others that assert that the wicked will be 

We hope we have made this matter plain. We wish 
to forestall all the evasions of the lovers of error. But 
ah ! what becomes of the immortal soul theory ? — 
Scattered to the winds of heaven ! And as this dogma 
carries with it, by logical consequence, fruits that dis- 
honor God and his Son, we heartily respond, Amen. 
Paul says, that He, " whom no man hath seen, nor can 
see," "the blessed and only Potentate, the Lord of 
Lords," " ONLY hath immortality." 1 Tim. 6 : 16. But 


Will ye, ye Theologians, say, " All men are immortal ?" 
Thus " Ye make void the word of God by your tra- 
ditions," The serpent said, " Ye shall not surely die, 
but shall be as Gods ;" and so say you ! " I have said, 
ye are g-ods, but ye shall die like men." Ps. 82 : 6. Do 
you say, '^^ You have taken away our gods, and what 
have we more ?" We reply ; we present you in the 
stead thereof, the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ, that 
proclaims to the obedient immortahty through him, 
when his kingdom shall be established throughout the 
earth, and the entire destruction of the conscious being 
of the wicked, a kingdom filled with universal holiness 
and universal happiness. 

We have shown that the soul faints, dies, expires ; is 
in the hand of the grave ; yea, is buried in the grave ; 
we bring you nine texts, that speak of numerous '' dead 
souls-" an army of one hundred and eighty-five thousand 
^' all d^ead souls ;" which clearly settles the Bible defini- 
nition of the term, and the mortality of the soul. We 
have shown that the translators, complaisant to a semi- 
Popish king, have wrested the Scriptures in almost every 
place where the word soul occurs, and where the absur- 
dity was not too glaring to escape detection by the com- 
mon reader; but when the nephesh and psuche are said 
to lie down in death, to expire, to enter the grave, they 
have used the terms life, dead body — any thing, rather 
than that the providers of the loaves and fishes, the 
dear people should know, that their fondly cherished 
^' immortal souls" would surely die, and be buried 
in the grave ! We have shown that the term soul 
is thirty times applied to beasts and to every creeping 
thing, and then, that the translators have used the 
term " life," or something else, for they were not so libe- 
ral as some are in these latter days, to get themselves 
out of a dilemma, to confer upon all the animal crea- 
tures, " immortal souls !" But when the nephesh and 
psuche are threatened with the second death, the term 
soul is introduced, so as to save the endless torment 
invention ! 




The Hebrew word ruali^ agrees with the Greek word 
pneuma^ and these are the only words that are properly 
translated spirit. The derivations and definitions of 
both words are nearly the same. Rvah is derived from 
ruah^ " to blow," and nesme^ " to breathe :" primarily 
signifies wind^ air^ breath ; but it is sometimes used to 
signify a principle, having some relation to electricity, 
diffused through the atmosphere, and perhaps through 
universal space, which is the principle that stimulates 
the organs of men and plants into activity, and which is 
used by the animals themselves to control their volun- 
tary motions. Thus, when an animal wishes to use a 
member, a current of electricity is transmitted by the 
will, through the nerves, to the blood in the member, 
and produces those contractions and dilations of the 
muscles of the member, which are necessary to move it 
in the required direction. This principle, being the 
principle of life in all creatures, is in the hands of God, 
and controlled by him ; hence, '' In him we live, and 
move, and have our being ;" and " God is the God of 
the spirits of all flesh." When God taketh away his 
spirit, and his breath, — that is, God's spirit, and God's 
breath, — then ^' man returneth to his earth, and his 
thoughts perish :" Ps. 146 : 4. Wherefore this spirit, 
in Scripture, is called neshemoth^ the breath of God, as 
well as the breath of man. 

The Greek word pneuma^ derived from pneo^ ".to 
blow," has been chosen by inspiration to represent the 
Hebrew word ruah. It means wind, air, breath, and a 


something, or principle contained in them, which imparts 
and sustains life. 

The spirit being the universal principle of hfe, its 
secondary, metaphorical, and poetical meanings, will be 
as various as the various effects of life ; and it will re- 
quire great care to enable us to ascertain the specific 
meaning which the word bears in particular cases. 

Some beings seem to live by the pure ruah^ or spirit, 
without the intervention of the atmosphere ; — such are 
called spiritual beings. Such are angels, and the incor- 
ruptible nature manifested by Jesus Christ, after he was 
risen from the tomb, for he ascended above the atmo- 
sphere ; and this nature is the pattern of that which 
Christians are to aspire after, " to seek for ;" and God, 
in conferring such a nature, necessarily confers eternal 
life : see Eom. 2 : 7. But the resurrected Saviour, and 
the angels, are tangible beings. Demons are called 
spirits ; by which we understand spiritual beings, beings 
that live by means of the pure or unadulterated spirit, 
or principle of all life. We have also, the *' to Hagion 
Fneuma^^^ the Holy, or Consecrated Spirit, and the 
seven Spirits of Grod. And spirit is sometimes thought 
to refer to God himself. John 4 : 24, " Fneuma ho 
Theos /" " The God [isj Spirit." But in the preceding 
verse, spirit is used as opposed to outward worship ; 
and it appears to be used in the same sense in this verse. 

We might therefore understand these verses thus : — 
The true worshippers shall worship the Father, not with 
outward observances, in particular places, as at Jerusa- 
lem, in preference to Mount Gerizim ; but with their 
minds and hearts : for God is an intelligent Being, and 
they that worship him, must worship him with intelli- 
gence and sincerity. In Ps. 139 : 7, " Whither shall I 
fiy from thy spirit ?" It is in heaven, it is in sheol^ (the 
grave,) and it is in the uttermost parts of the sea. It 
pervades all things, is the second cause of all motion, 
whether in the planets, the tides, the lightnings of hea- 
ven, or in the breathing creatures that God has made. 
It may have been this ruah Elohim^ spirit of the Elehim, 
that " brooded upon the face of the waters;" Gen. 1 : 2. 
It is not necessarily implied here that the ruah was a 
personal being ; but that God's intelligence, or this 
spirit, was every where Therefore, we infer, that the 


nature of God is not clearly determined by any of these 

This principle of life, or spirit, is not the air, nor the 
breath, — ^but is contained in the air, and breath. The 
breath *n-spired, and the breath eic-pired, possess differ- 
ent properties ; the ^a;-pired breath being deprived of its 
spirit J which has been transfused into the blood in the 
lungs, for the exigences of life, and is used up^ and 
requires to be constantly replenished. Life, then, is not 
an abstract principle, but is an effect of this spirit, 
operating alike upon all organized beings. We say, 
therefore, strictly speaking, that this spirit is not the air, 
but is contained in the air. Angels may live by pure 
spirit ; men cannot. Man has no abstract essence 
within him, which gives to him any pre-eminence over 
the living souls of other animals. They all live, yea, the 
souls of all live in common, by breathing the b^-eath of 
LIVES ; because this breath contains the spirit, the sus- 
taining principle of all lives. Man's superiority is 
derived from his superior organization. The neshemet 
chayim^ the breath of lives, that animates alike all 
animals, is the spirit diluted with air. God caused man 
to breathe, the neshemet chayim^ breath of lives^ not the 
pure ruah. Gen. 6: 17, '^ I bring a flood of waters 
upon the earth, to destroy all flesh wherein is the {^uah 
chayim^ spirit of hves, from under heaven ; and all that 
is in the earth {yigo) shall expire ;" shall breathe out the 
SPIRIT OF LIVES. Gcn. 1 \ 15, " And there went in unto 
Noah, into the ark, two and two of all the flesh wherein 
is the {ruah chayim) spirit of lives^ Ver. 21, " And 
all flesh {yigwa) expired^ that moved upon the earth, 
both of fowl and of cattle, and of beasts, and of every creep- 
ing thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man : 
ALL in whose nostrils was the {neshmeth ruah chayim,) 
breath of the spirit of lives, of all that was in^the dry 
land, (methu,) died. And every living substance was 
destroyed.'' Thus we see that all animals, in common with 
man, live by breathing the same spirit. You will per- 
ceive that Moses uses the term all flesh, for every living 
creature, man included. Notwithstanding all creatures 
possessed, while living, the spirit of lives, they had no 
spirit that could live, after they had breathed out this 
spirit ; which spirit, though the cause of life, is not a 


living thing. Every living thing died, and the spirit 
was expired, breathed out into the universal pabulum ol 
all lives, which is in the hands of God. If the spirit 
was a " LIVING THING," it died also, for every living thing 
died, and every living substance was destroyed. Isa. 
31:3, "Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; 
and their horses flesh, and not spirit." It is no 
where intimated that any part of man or beast is 
a gltost. The Saxon word, ghost^ is from gust of 
wind. Its parallel is not found in the original Scriptures, 
and it ought not to be found in the translation. The 
spirit of man, then, is not a living entity ; and although 
no creature can live without it, it is not alive itself It 
is not organized for the development of life, and there- 
fore is not mortal nor immortal, and the expression, 
" deathless spirit," as appHed to man, is a compound of 
Paganism, tradition and nonsense. 

But spirit has numerous secondary meanings, such as 
inteUigence, courage, the mind, the temper, the disposi- 
tion, &c. ; and we have the spirit of fear, of love, of 
bondage ; and sixty other spirits. 


The primary meaning of spirit is wind, or air. Exo- 
15 : 10, " Thou didst blow with thy ruah, wind, the sea 
covered them." Ps. 147 : 18, " He causeth his ruah to 
blow, and the waters flow." Job 41 : 16, " One is so 
near to another, that no ruah, air, can pass between 
them." Pro. 11 : 29, " He that troubleth his own house 
shall inherit the ruah, wind^ Pro. 25 : 23, " The north 
ruah,vj\iidi, driveth away rain." Isa. 41 : 16, " The ricah 
shall carry them away, and the whirl-rwaA shall scatter 
them." Verse 29, " Their molten images are ruah and 
confusion." Gen. 3:8, *^ And they heard the voice of 
Jehovah Elohim walking in the garden in the ruuh 
(breeze) of the day." See also, Prov. 30 : 4 ; Ecc. 1:6; 
5 : 16 ; Jer. 5 : 13 ; Hos. 12 : 1 ; Exo. 14 : 21 ; Isa. 7:2; 
Jer. 14:6; Jonah 1:4; and many others. How absurd 
would it be to call the ruah a ghost in any of these places. 
Ruah is translated wind in hundreds of texts. So of the 
corresponding word pneuma. John 3 : 8, " The (pneu- 
ma,) wind bloweth w^here itlisteth." The learned doubt 


the correctness of the common translation of Heb. 1 : 7, 
and Ps. 104 : 4, " Who maketh ihQ pneu7nata^ winds, his 
messengers, and the flames of fire his ministers." 


Job 37: 10, "By the ruah^ breathy of God frost is 
given." Ps. 33 : 6, " By the word of the Lord were the 
(shomayim,) atmospheres made, and all the hosts of 
them by the ruah^ breathy of his mouth." Isa. 11:4, 
"With the ruah^ breathy of his Hps shall he slay the wrick- 
ed." Jas. 2 : 26, " For as the body without the pneuma^ 
breathy is dead ; so faith without works is dead also." 
Here the text reads spirit^ the margin, breath. The ar- 
gument of James is, that it requires spirit or breath, with 
the body^ to constitute a living being. And his argu- 
ment would be fallacious if the spirit could live without 
the body ; for then works without faith would be living II 
Eev. 11 : 11, " After three days and a half, the pneuma 
zoes^ breath of life, or spirit of life, from God entered 
into them, and they stood upon their feet." Eev. 13 : 
15, " And he had power to give pneuma^ breath^ov 
spirit^ (which w^ould give hfe,) unto the image of the 
beast." Now, by what Bible authority is it said that 
ruah and pneuma ever mean a gJiost ? But more yet. 
Job 26 : 4, " To whom hast thou uttered words, and 
whose ruah^ breathy came from thee ?" Ecc. 3 : 19, "Yea, 
they (both man and beast,) have all one ruah^ spirit^ or 
breath." Verse 21, " Who know^eth (any difference be 
tw^een) the ruah^ breathy or spirit of man, that is breath 
ed upward ; and the ruah^ breathy or spirit of a beast^ 
that is breathed downwards to the earth ?" Perhaps 
Solomon meant, who can explain the manner in which 
the ruah acts upon the organization so as to produce 

No upright and intelhgent writer contradicts himself; 
and yet some have supposed that Solomon does so in 
Ecc. 12: 5, 7, ^ Man goeth to his long home, and the 
mourners go about the streets.... Then shall the dust re- 
turn to the earth as it was, and the ruah^ breath^or spirit^ 
shall return to God who gave it;" (as it was before it 
was given). What was the ruah when God gave it ? 
Not a living entity, but the breath, or spirit, by which 


the man lived ; which Solomon says, is the same in man 
and beast. The man made of dust Vy.^-turns to dust, and 
this principle of life returns, goes back again into the 
universal pabulum of all animal life — into the hands of 
God. Job 12 : 9, " The hand of the Lord hath wrought 
this. In whose hand is the nepliesh^ soul^ of every living 
thing, and riiah^ spirit^ or breathy of all mankind." There 
is a parallel expression to Ecc. 12: 7, in Ps. 104: 29, 
*' Thou takest away their ruah^ spirit, or breath, they 
die, and {they) return to their dust." And again in Ps. 
146 : 4, " His ruahj spirit^ or breathy goeth forth, (to God 
of course,) he returneth to his earth ; in that very day 
his thoughts perish.'''* Job 34 : 14, "If God set his heart 
upon man, if he gather unto himself his ruah and his 
nesme^ breath ; all flesh shall perish together, and man 
shall turn again unto dust." Ps. 104 : 29, " Thou hidest 
thy face, they are troubled : thou takest away their 
ruah^ THEY die, and return to their dust. Thou sendest 
forth thy ruah^ they are created, (" born again" from 
the dust :) and thou renewest the face of the earth." 

Ecc. 12 : 7, says, the ruah goes to God who gave it. 
Now if God intends to restore this ruah to the man, so 
that he may live again^ where does God bring this ruah 
from ? We shall see that it is not the same ruah, but 
ruah of the same kind ; though perhaps less diluted 
with atmospheric air. We will let Ezekiel answer : 37 : 
5, " Thus saith the Lord God unto these bones : Behold 
I will cause ruah to enter into you, and ye shall live. 
And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh 
upon you, and cover you with skin, and put ruah in you, 
and ye shall live ; and ye shall know that I am the Lord." 
....Verse 8, " Lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon 
them, and the skin covered them above : but there was 
no ruah in them. Then said he unto me. Prophesy unto 
the ruah^ ivind ; prophesy. Son of Man, and say to the 
ruah^ Thus saith the Lord God : Come from (where ? 
from heaven ? Nay, but from) the/owr ruah^ tvinds, Oh 
ruah^ and breathe upon these slain that they may live. 
So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the ruah 
came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their 
feet, an exceeding great army." Thus we see that the 
ruah in Ecc. 12 : 7, went to the four winds^ and at the 
resurrection, comes again from the four winds : whif»h 


winds " God holds in his fists," so that when the ritah 
goes to the four winds, the ruah goes to God, and when 
the ruah comes from the four winds, the ruah comes 
from God. Verse 13, " Ye shall know that I am the 
Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, 
and brought you up out of your graves, and shall put my 
ruah in you and ye shall live, and I shall place you in 
your own land." Thus we see that it is God's ruah^ one 
universal principle pervading the atmosphere, and not 
many distinct ruah^ as theologians teach, and is not a 
living thing, though the cause of life; but which our 
honest translators have translated wind, breath, spirit, 
and spirit of God, so as best to favor the Pagan fable of 
the separate conscious existence of a spirit belonging to 
man ! ! We believe this to be a prophecy of a literal 
resurrection ; but suppose it is only a similitude of the 
resurrection. The man is here put together piece by 
piece, and a remarkable prominence is given to the 
breath, as containing the living principle. After the man 
was completely formed again, he was but a dead soul, 
for " there was no ruah^ breath in him." Now here was 
the place to mention the separately existing, living ghost 
or spirit, if there had been such a thing ; but as God 
knew of no such living thing, he plainly intimates that all 
that was necessary to restore these dead souls to living 
souls, or these dead men to living men, was breath /rom 
the FOUR WINDS. Yea, as in Gen. 2 : 7, God will blow 
into their nostrils again the breath of lives, and again 
they will become hving souls. 


Job 27 : 1. Job*s friends had asserted that the severe 
chastisements of Job, and of men in general, were the 
just retributions he and they received for some great, 
though, perhaps, secret crimes in this world. Job bold- 
ly and perhaps impiously, asserts upon his solemn oath, 
that in his case, the rule had been completely reversed. 
He commences in the manner of Hebrew poetry with 
three parallelisms, in which the second line of each is but 
the repetition or echo of the first. " And Job continued 
to carry on his parable, and said : — 



As El liveth, he turneth aside my right ! 
1. I And Shaddai hath made me to be at variance 
with it ! 
For so long as my breath is in me, 
And the spirit of Eloah is in my nostrils. 
o ^ My Ups shall not speak what is wrong, 

' \ Nor shall my tongue utter deceit." 
In the first line of the second parallelism, the word for 
breath, is nesme^ in the second line it is ruah. In many 
places this nesme which is said to be the breath of man, 
is hkewise said to be the breath of God. Therefore we 
conclude that nesme and ruah both refer to the same 
identical thing ; the nesme contains the ruah^ and both 
are the spirit or breath of God, and both are in the nos- 
trils of man. 

That the nesme, breath, and the ruah, spirit, are analo- 
gous, we shall further make evident. Ps. 1 35 : 17, 
" Neither is there any ruah in their mouth?'^ The 
translators have perverted the meaning of ruah in many 
places. Micah 2 : 11, " If a man walk with the ruah, 
wind, and lie falsely ;" rendered, " If a man walking in 
the spirit and falsehood, do lie." Zech. 6: 5, ^' These 
are the four ruah of the heavens ;" rendered, " spirits of 
the heavens ;" margin, winds. Eccles. 8:8, *' There is 
no man that hath power over the ruah, to retain the 
ruah ;" translated spirit ; but it evidently means breath. 
Ruah is translated breath in Gen. 6:17, *"Two and two 
of all flesh, wherein is the ruah of chayim.^'' This is 
translated, " breath of life." But why have the trans- 
lators suppressed the plural, lives ? Was it lest the 
common reader should perceive that the spirit was the 
one universal principle of all lives, and not a number of 
individual beings, one of which was confined in each 
creature ? So, v. 22, " All in whose nostrils was the 
nesme of the ruah of chayim?'' Thus the breath that 
contains the spirit by which all creatures live, is a com- 
mon principle, inhaled and exhaled by the nose ; hence 
said to be in the " nostrils." In Ezek. 1 : 20, 21 ; 10 : 
17 ; Rev. 11 : 11, and 13 : 15, the ruah and pneuina are 
made to represent the principle of hfe. " And the 
wheels were hfted up," [from the earth.] But how ? 
seeing wheels have no life ? " For the ruah of the 
living creature was in the wheels, [and lifted them up ;] 


margin reads *' spirit of life." " He had po\\er to give 
pneuma unto the image of the beast." " Spirit of life, 
pneuma zoes, from God entered into them." Isa. 42 : 
5, " He that giveth nesme, breathy unto the people upon 
it, and 7"uahj spirit^ to them that walk therein." Here 
the nesme^ and the ruah^ are made analogous by the 
parallelism. In Job. 34 : 14, if God takes from man and 
beast GocPs ruah and 7iesme^ the same breath of the 
spirit of lives God breathed into them — then, all flesh 
perish. So in Ps. 104 : if God take away his ruah from 
man and beast, they die ; if he sends forth his ruahy 
they are created. 

These passages all prove that the nesme contains the 
ruah, and the ruah is the essential ingredient in the 
nesme ; and that the spirit, or principle of life, is in the 
breath ; hence said to be in the nostrils of man. Now, 
we ask the candid, does the ruah, and pneuma, when 
related to life, ever mean a ghost ? or any thing else 
than the breath of lives ? Were the translators justified 
in inserting the word ghost in any place ? or in so trans- 
lating the word spirit, a5 to countenance the Pagan 
fable of its separate conscious existencs ? 


The word ghost is a Saxon word, derived from gust of 
wind, and occurs fourteen times in the King's version. 
If, in A.D. 161 1, it meant merely the giving up the wind, 
or breath of lives, its introduction was then harmless ; 
but now it is used to support the tremendous and con- 
tradictory dogma, that while the man is dead, his ghost 
is consciously suffering in a hell of fire or torment, prior 
to the final judgment ; or is enjoying ineffable delights, 
in a place called " paradise," or " heaven," or the " spirit 
world," or " beyond the bounds of time and space." 
Let us examine these passages. Gen. 25 : 7, " And 
these are the days of the years of Abraham's life which he 
livedj one hundred and seventy-five years. And Abra- 
ham [gave up the ghost,'] and [died] in a good old age, 
an old man, and full of years, and was gathered to his 
people. And his sons, Isaac and Ishmael, buried him in 
the cave of Machpelah," (v. 8,) literally, And Abraham 


he (govaj) wasted away^ he [muth^) died. Greenfield 
translates gova^ expired ; that is, breathed out his breath; 
but this is evidently a paraphrase. Professor Pick gives 
the meaning, " wasted awayP In Gen. 6 : 17, gova is 
referred to every creature, and translated '' shall die /" 
and, 7 : 21, '^ all flesh {gova^^) died ; all flesh wasted away. 
Gen. 25: 18, " And these are the years of the hfe of 
Ishmael, one hundred and thirty-seven years, and he 
[gave up the ghost,] and died, and was gathered to his 
fathers." The words here are the same as in verse 8, 
" He (gova,) wasted away; and he {muth,) diedy By 
what authority did the translators render gova^ when 
apphed to beasts, " shall die," and " died ;" and when 
the same word apphed to Abraham and Ishmael, trans- 
late it " gave up the ghost ?" But the original is very 
emphatic, repeating the personal pronoun, he ; it is said 
of Abraham, that he wasted away, he died, and he was 
gathered to his fathers, (who were idolators lying in the 
grave,) and they buried him in the cave of Machpelah. 
The very same is said of Ishmael, excepting that his 
burial is expressed only by the phrase, " he was gathered 
to his fathers :" and the context assures us, of both, that 
their living existence terminated in a given portion of 
time. Let the reader ponder this case, as we shall 
have to refer to it again. 

In Gen. 35 : 28, the same forms of expression recur, 
in relation to Isaac, and gova, which means wasted away, 
is translated, " gave up the ghost." The death of Jacob 
is recorded in Gen. 49 : 29-33, where gova is again trans- 
lated, " yielded up the ghost." Gova is thus shame- 
fully translated in Lam. 1 : 19, and four times in Job. 
We shall give the passages in Job, from Fry's transla- 
tion, who beheved in the immortality of the soul, but 
he does not attempt to deduce the separate existence of it 
from these passages, which the reader can compare with 
the HONEST rendering of the King's translators. 

Job 3.11, " Why might I not have died at the birth ? 

Have come forth from the womb and [gova^ expired 7 

13. For now had I been lying down and been at ease, 
I had been aslee'p ; rest had long since been mine 5 

14. Among kings and leaders of the earth, 
Who had erected for themselves sepulchres .' 


10 : 18, '* Why then didst thou bring me forth from the womb? 
I might have [gova,] expired, and no eye have seen me. 

19. I should have been as though / had not existed 7 
Have been carried from the womb to the (sheol^) grave, 

20. Are not my days few and failing ? 
Spare me, that I may refresh me a little ; 

21. Before I depart to return no more : 

To the land of obscurity, and of the deadly shade ; 
To the land covered from the light, as of total darkness ; 
The deadly shade, where are no vicissitudes ; 
But the noon-tide is as total darkness !" 

The word translated land might be translated earthy 
or ground. Job here clearly represents the state of man 
after death, as a complete blank, a state of utter uncon- 
sciousness : 

13 : 19, " Who is he that contendeth with me ? 

For now if I be still, I shall [gova^\ not breathe.^'' 

In 14 : 5, Job avers, that man has but a frail existence 
at best, and must soon die, without the interference of 
the Almighty. 

6. ** Let him alone, and he will/ai/, 

He will soon fill up as a hireling his day. 

7. For there is hope of a tree, 
When it hath been cut down, 
That it may bud forth afresh 
And its suckers not fail. 

8. Though its root be grown old in the soil, 
And its trunk be dead in the dust, 

9. By the inhaling of water it may germinate, 
And form its boughs like a fresh-set plant. 

10. But the strong man dieth, and lieth prostrate j 
But man [gova^'\ expireth — and where is he? 

11. As the billows pass away with the tides, 
And the flood is exhausted and dried up ; 

So man lieth down, and will rise up no more. 

12. Till the heavens be dissolved they will not awake, 
Nor yet be aroused from their sleep ! 

13. Oh that thou wouldst hide me in (sheol) the grave ! 
That thou wouldst conceal me till thy wrath be passed. 

14. That thou wouldst hasten the set time, and remember me, 
When there shall die a man that shall live again; 

All my set time will I patiently wait, 
Till the period of my reviving shall come. 


15. Thou wilt call, and T shall answer, 

Thou wilt seek with desire the work of thy hands. 
19. The waters wear away the stones, 

The dust of the earth inundates her produce, 

And the,hopeof mortal man thou consumest. 
21. His sons may come to honor, but he will not know it^ 

And they may be reduced, but he will not discern them.^^ 

Will the reader refer to the common version. In the 
four places where the common version have inserted 
" gave up the gost," the original is gova^ which here is 
three times translated ^'- expired, ^'^ and once "not breathe"; 
but the sense of *' wasting away," would be appUcable 
in every case. Fry is continually commenting upon the 
obvious fact that Job had no idea of the immortality of 
the soul, but Fry's notes are full of it ; affirming that it 
is only clearly revealed in the gospel. Nevertheless the 
gospel, containing the promise of immortality, was preach- 
ed to Abraham ; and he, like Job, was taught that he 
should become the future possessor of an everlasting in- 
heritance, by a resurrection to be obtained through the 
" MAN that should die and live again ^ Job speaks so 
plainly of the unconsciousness of the dead, that the trans- 
lators in revenge, it would seem, have made him teach 
five times the separate existence of the ghost ! 1 

11 : 20. " But the eyes of the wicked shall fail, 
And refuge shall perish from them, 
Ay, their hope shall be an expiring hreathr 

Common version, the " giving up of the ghost ;" the 
margin and Parkhurst translate, a puff of breath ; Good, 
a scattered breath. The original is here, nophakhneph 
eshy which Prof Pick says, means " breathed out tht 
breathy We suppose it means, Their hope shall be as 
a soul or being that has ceased to breathe — a nonentity. 

Jer. 15 : 9, " She that hath borne seven, languisheth . 
she hath [given up the ghost] ; her sun has gone down 
while it was yet day." Nophakh-nephesh, again : she 
hath breathed out her being, or ceased to breathe. 

Mat. 27 : 50, Authorized version : " Jesus when he 
had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.'*'* 
Mark 15 : 37, " Gave up the ghost." Luke 23 : 46, "Fa- 
ther, into thy hands I commend my spirit : and having 


said this, he gave up theghosty John 19 : 30, '' He bow- 
ed his head and gave up the ghost." Verse 33, " But 
when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead al- 
ready, they brake not his legs : but one of the soldiers 
with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there- 
out blood and water." In Math., " apheke to pneuma''' ; 
he yielded up his breath, or expired. Mark, exepneuse^ 
he breathed out his breath, or expired. I^uke, exeptneu- 
sen^ expired. John, paredoke to pneuma^ resigned his 
spirit, or breath, or life. Apheke to pneuma^ as in Math., 
he yielded up his breath, or expired, w^as a common 
phrase in heathen Greece. See Emipedes, Hecuba, 569 : 
epci d? apheke pneuma thaiiasimo sphage^ when she had 
exjnred by the deadly blow. As the Greek of Mark and 
Luke affirm that Jesus expired^ the expressions of Mat- 
thew and John must be construed in accordance with 
them, which indeed is their obvious import. 

We cannot pass by this important passage without a 
fuller investigation of the question. Did Christ truly die ? 
If he did not, we '' are yet in our sins," under the con- 
demnation of a law^ that consigns us to death, to nothing- 
ness, and to '^ dust" If Christ did not die, did not 
become entirely unconscious, he of course could not 
rise from a state of death ; and those w ho have fallen 
asleep in Christ, as well as all the rest of mankind that 
have died, have already perished, without a vestige of a 
hope of iiE-living. But if Christ died, and has risen 
again, then has he ransomed his people from the grave, 
and he will come again, and call them from thence, to be 
for ever with himself in his kingdom. But this passage 
has been unwarrantably altered by the mother of harlots 
and abominations of the earth; and w^e are indebted to 
Granville Penn, and the researches of Bentleyand Birch 
for the restoration of this highly important text. This 
clause should be inserted in Mat. 27 : 50, " Alios de ki- 
bon, logchen, enuxen autou ten pleuran, kai exelthen 
udor kai a:ma." The whole verse anciently read some- 
thing like this ; after stating the fact that vinegar was 
offered to Jesus, it is added — [*' but another, taking a 
spear, pierced his side ; and there came forth water and 
blood] and Jesus, crying out again" [i. e., as before,] 
*' with a loud voice, expired." 

We have placed the words which have been so shame- 


fully suppressed in brackets. This reading is sustained by 
the two oldest MSB., the Vatican^ Sind Ephrem ; by the 
copies of Diadorus, Tatian, and various other holy fa- 
thers, (Schol. Cod., 72); by the ancient Jerusalem, Syriac 
and Ethiopic versions ; by some of the most ancient La- 
tin versions; and in six other MSS, (L., 5, 48, 67, 115^ 
^nd 127 of Wetstein). Eemember that one ancient MSS. 
of the fourth or fifth century, is more intrinsically valua- 
ble, and is better authority than hundreds of MSS. of 
the eleventh and twelfth centuries, which have all suffer- 
ed in transcription, and can never be more perfect than 
those from which they have been so often recopied. 

This doctrine harmonizes with every other Scripture. 
*' I lay down my hfe of myself," is equal to, I voluntarily 
submit myself to an instrument, or cause producing 
death. " I have power to take (my life) again." And 
so has every Christian. But this power resides not in 
himself; but in Christ who will confer it. So Christ was 
raised by the power of God. " Enoch was translated 
that he should not see death^'' but Christ truly died for 
ns. The whole gospel rests upon this foundation ; that 
Christ the Lord, the Holy One, did die, according to the 
natural law of death pronounced upon Adam and his 
posterity. "^^ He became obedient to death ;" was " Led 
as a sheep to the slaughter;" "He tasted dea,th for 
tivery man." *' He took upon himself our curse of death, 
5;md hung upon the tree.^' He prophesied that he should 
be dehvered to the gentiles, and that they would kill 
him. He is said to be killed ; to be slain ; diacheirizes- 
tliai^ to be dispatched ; anaireisthai, to be made away ; 
ajwlesthai^ to perish ; to be cut off; to be slaughtered; 
and theiesthai^ to be sacrificed ; which words all import 
a true and proper death. Eor remarks on the death of 
Christ in the sense of ceasing to exist in any form as a 
living conscious being, see 27th sermon on the creeds by 
Isaac Barrow, vol. 2, p. 382. But if Jesus ""yielded up 
his ghost^'' as a living separate spirit, then in no sense did 
Jesus Christ himself die. 

SS* The passage. Mat. 27 : 50, of the piercing of 
Christ prior to his death, was condemned in the four- 
teenth century, by Popes Clement V., and his successor 
John. We may regard it as a general rule, that w^her- 
ever the Scriptures have been designedly altered to sus- 


tain a favorite doctrine, it is a confession of its upholders, 
that the Scriptures do not plainly teach the doctrine, and 
that the doctrine itself is an invention of men. 

Oh, immortal-soulism, what hast thou done ? Thou 
hast corrupted the word of the living God, in a point 
vitally affecting the salvation of the race 1 Thou hast sub- 
verted the very foundations of the gospel of Jesus Christ 
the Son of God 1 Thou hast perverted the account of 
the most precious boon of God, the gift of his Son ; 
and thou hast concealed the glorious fact, that the Son 
of God gave himself, his life, for us, to ransom us from 
the dominion of death, the grave ! Thou hast arrogated 
continued conscious existence to thyself, which belongs 
to him whom no man hath seen nor can see, the only God, 
who only hath immortality [ Thou hast despised the 
precious gift of God, which is eternal life^ by claiming it 
independently of his peculiar gift I Thou hast plucked 
the brightest diadem from the head of him who is the 
Eesurrection and the Life, as being the only medium 
through whom the gift of immortality is bestowed, and 
hast claimed it as being already thine, in virtue of thy 
relation to the first Adam I Thou hast rendered the 
stupendous sacrifice of Christ useless, unmeaning, and 
unnecessary 1 Thou hast fostered the pride and inde- 
pendence of thy race, and hast ' prevented many from 
laying hold of that which is life indeed, te$ o7itos zoes / 
(1 Tim. 6 : 19.) Thou hast " changed the truth of God 
into a he," and hast virtually acknowledged that the ser- 
pent spake the truth when he said, Ye shall not surely 
die ! But enough. "Oh my soul, come not thou into 
their secret ; unto their assembly, mine honor, be not 
thou united." 

Stephen's case considered, with others. 

Acts 7 : 59, " And they stoned Stephen, calling upon 
God, and saying, Lord Jesus, — dexai to piteuma mou^ — 
receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with 
a loud voice. Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And 
when he had said this, he fell asleep. And Saul was 
consenting unto his death,.., And devout men carried 
Stephen to his burial." 

The grammar of the text charges the saying, " Lord 


Jesus, receive my spirit," upon the wicked Jews, and 
afterwards records what Stephen did and said. We 
waive this, being wilHng to allow that the translators 
were fallible, and attribute both sayings to Stephen. 
Dexaij means the right, cheir^ hand^ being understood ; 
metaphorically it means assistance, aid, strength, courage ; 
and is equal to the expression, " Lord Jesus, strengthen 
my spirit" ; or nerve me up to endurance ; and after this 
Stephen himself ^^ feli^ asleep" ; and the Evangelist re- 
cords Stephen's " death ^'''^ and the carrying of Stephen's 
self to the grave. We would give the meaning of the 
59th v., thus : "And the Jews stoned Stephen, while 
he was invoking the Lord, and saying. Lord Jesus, assist 
me to suffer." 

The expression of our Saviour in Luke 23 : 46, " Fa 
ther, into thy hands" — parathesomai to pneuma mou — 
translated, "I commend my spirit," j^ara, intensive; 
thesis^ pledge, or a deposite to be carefully reserved. 1 
deposite my life as a treasure to be reserved till thou 
raisest me to life again. " I commit the care of my life 
to thee." Pneuma^ the principle of life, being put for 
life itself In Ps. 31 : 5, is a similar phrase. Paul com- 
mends himself to God in a similar way. 2 Tim. 1:12, 
" I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that 
he is able to keep that which I have committed unto 
him, (eis) unto that day." Also, 1 Pet. 4 : 19, " Where 
fore, let them that suffer according to the will of God 
commit the keeping of their souls to him in well-doing, 
as unto a faithful Creator." " Their souls," means their 
persons, their existence. 

Acts 5:5, " Ananias hearing these words fell down and 
peson exepsuxe^ [gave up the ghost]." Verse 10, " Then 
fell she down strait way at his feet, and exepsuxeny 
[yielded up the ghost]." Both these expressions are 
equal to, " exhaled their life." They breathed out their 
breath. There is no ghost about these expressions, ex- 
cept what was in the imagination of the translators, biased 
by Pagan tradition. 

We have now examined all the cases of ghosts we 
read of in the authorized version, and find them all fabri- 
cations. We have found the words gova^ wasted away ; 
nophakh-nepheshy breathed out the breath ; pneuma^ 
principle of life; expsttche^ expired; and expressions 


compounded of breathing and spririt, translated by the 
^vord '' ghost ,'' without the shghtest authority. But we 
will examine a few more expressions to ascertain whether 
there be any term equivalent to a soul, spirit, or ghost, 
that can live separately from the man himself, or his 

Job 4 : 13, " Amid disturbed thoughts from visions of the night, 
When deep sleep had fallen upon men, 

14. A palpitation came on me, and a tremor, 
And made the whole of my bones to shake ! 

15. And a (ruah) spirit passed before me, 
The hair of my flesh rose on end ! 

16. It stood still, but I could not discern its countenance, 
A shape was before mine eyes ; 

There was a stillness, and I heard a voice: 

17. * Shall a mortal bejusc before Eloah? 

Before his Maker shall e?^o^^5/^, mortal man, be cleared'?" 

We confess we no not understand this transaction. It 
might have been a vision, or an optical illusion ; but as 
Eliphaz is subsequently condemned by God, we need not 
receive it as inspiration. At all events, whatever may 
have been the nature of the phantom, it was not the 
ghost of a man, and it displayed more wisdom than men 
now possess, for they have not yet learned that they are 

Mat. 14 : 26, " And when the disciples saw him walk- 
ing on the sea, they were troubled, saying it is a spirit j 
and they cried out for fear." Mark 6 : 49, " They sup- 
posed it had been a spirit." In both these places the 
Greek is phantasma^ and ought to have been translated 
a phantom ; that is, an optical illusion, an apparition, an 

Luke 24 : 37, " They supposed that they had seen a 
spirit." Verse 39, " It is I : for a spirit hath not flesh 
and bones.'' In this place, Griesbach puts phantasma 
in the margin, which doubtless is the true reading. 
Those who have read the " Diary of a Physician," or 
kindred publications, know that when these are not opti- 
cal illusions, they exist only in the diseased brain, and it 
requires a. strong effort of the mind to be assured that 
they are not realities. 

Luke 8 : 52, 55, He said, " She is not dead, but sleep- 


eth....and he took her by the hand, saying, Maid, arise. 
And her spirit came again, and she arose." Kai epes- 
trepse to pneuma antes. She may have been in a state 
of aphixia, as would seem by the expression, " Not dead, 
but sleepeth." Then the expression may mean no more 
than she revived. Compare Judges 15 : 19, " And when 
he had drunk, his rwa/i," — translated " spirit (his anima- 
tion) came again" ; also, 1 Sam. 30 : 12, " And when he 
had eaten, his ruah^ his spirit, came again to him." If 
the spirits in these cases w^ere ghosts, and went from 
them, they would have been dead ; but they eat and 
drank to bring back the ghost! In Sam. 1 : 11, 16, 19, 
three times is the soul brought back again to those that 
were starving, by eating meat. See margin. Similar 
forms of expression occur in Ezk. 38 : 8 ; Gen. 42 : 28 ; 
margin, '' Their heart went forth" ; 2 Kings 5 : 14, " His 
flesh came again." These idiomatic expressions suffi- 
ciently explain the phrase, " her spirit came again." We 
trust we have " laid all these gobHns" so that they will 
not again perplex men of plain understandings. 

Spirit means vigor ^ courage, animation. The ruah of 
Jacob revived when he heard that Joseph was alive. 
Their heart melted, neither was there ruah in them any 
more. There was no more ruah in her. Gen. 45 : 27 : 
Josh. 5 : 1 ; 1 Kings 10 : 5. We will give an exposition 
of Zech. 12 : 1, under the next head. 


The words ruah and pneuma are used to signify the 
mind about two hundred times ; but the heart, hands, 
and eyes, are used for the mind. The heart is used for 
the mind in nine hundred and fifty-five places ; but the 
heart does not perform the functions of thought ; though 
the brain cannot develop mind unless it be supplied with 
blood containing the spirit or principle of Hfe, which has its 
centre in the heart. No wonder then that the heart and 
spirit, by a figure of speech, are used for the mind itself 
Pharoah and Nebuchadnezzar had dreams that troubled 
their ruah. Gen. 41:8; Dan. 2:1,3. In Dan. 4 : 19, 
it is said that it was "his thoughts that troubled him.'''' 
Gen. 26 : 25, " Which were bitterness of ruah unto Re- 
bekah" ; tr., '^ grief of mind." Exo, 6 ; 9, The Israelites 


*^ hearkened not unto Moses for anguish of ruah^^ dis- 
tress of mind. Ecc. 7 : 8, 9, " The patient in ruah is bet- 
ter than the proud in ruah. Be not hasty in thy ruah 
to be angry." Spirit is here used for mind ; though the 
margin makes the walking of the ruah^ the walking of 
the soul ; it evidently means gentleness of temper. Lk. 
1: 17, John "shall go before him in the spirit and 
power of Elijah," with the same inflexible disposition. 
John surely did not appear in the ghost of Elijah. 1 
Cor. 16 : 18, " For they have refreshed my spirit, (mind) 
and yours." 2 Cor. 2 : 13, " I had no rest in my spirit 
(mind) because I found not Titus." Acts 19 : 21 ; 18: 
5, Paul " purposed in spirit" ; " was pressed in spirit." 
This is a sample of the way in which the word spirit 
is often used. 

Zech. 12 : 1, " The burden of the word of the Lord for 
Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the heavens, 
and layeth the foundations of the earth, and formeth the 
spirit of man within him. Behold I will make Jerusa- 
lem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, 
when they shall be in the siege." 

This text has been dwelt upon, as though it ajBforded 
undoubted evidence of the separate conscious existence 
of the spirit of man. But does it say so ? ^y no 
means. God formed the heart of man within him. 
Shall we rush, therefore, to the illogical conclusion, that 
the heart is sELF-conscious, and can live independently 
of the man, or of his body ? and especially as we are 
plainly informed that the Lord God formed man of the 
dust of the ground. If the spirit be the essential man, 
as our opponents argue, then was the spirit formed of 
the dust of the ground? Luke 11 : 40, " Foolish men, 
did not he that formed that which is without^ form that 
which is within^ also ?" The passage says, that God 
formed the spirit of man within him^ — not that God 
formed a separate spirit, that was, or could be conscious 
outside of the man, and then put this independent spirit 
within him. 

As there are fifty-four diflferent spirits dwelling in 
man, as we prove, we ask our opponents which of these 
spirits God formed within him ? Can we not suppose 
that one of them is meant, which is not a separate 
ghost ? And, now we enquire, what spirit ?— I. What 


did God design to express, in the passage under con- 
sideration ? Certainly not the specific manner in which 
God created man, but the great fact, that as God was 
the creator of the mind of man, as well as of the heavens 
and the earth, therefore he possesses both the power 
and authority to make him tremble before him. This 
seems to be the obvious meaning of this exceedingly po- 
<itical passage. 2. Whal spirit is meciM d The inseparable 
prefix, ^, translated i^itltbiy has at least twenty-five dif- 
ferent meanings ; and the wx)rd, ruah^ translated, spirit , 
has more than sixty different meanings. We cull out a 
few, either of which the reader may choose, as a sy- 
nonysrn for ruah^ m this passage : 1, breath ; 2, the 
principle of life eontajjied in the breath; hence, 3, the 
spirit of lives, by which all animals live ; 4, fife ; 5, 
mind ; G, disposition ; 7, animation ; 8, vigor ; 9, intel- 
lectual and moral faculties, as opposed to those that are 
possessed by other animals ; and, 10, understanding. 
We select the second and tenth, and say, God " formeth 
the spirit of lives which is in man ;" or those instrumen- 
talities that cause life. Or, Job 32 : 8, ' There is a spirit 
[of tvisdom^] in man : and (ne^Jiomok) the breath of the 
Almighty giveth them {under stcmdi^ig.y^ Let the 
reader study all we have written upon spirit before he 
draws an unjust inference from this isolated text. He 
who pertinaciously quotes this text, to sustain the Pagan 
fable, forfeits all claim to candor. 


Ezek. 13: 3, '' Wo unto the foolish prophets that 
follow their own spirit," (their own mind.) I Cor. 16 : 
18, ^^ They have refreshed my spirit and yours," (my 
mind and your mitid.) 2 Cor. 2 : 13, ^' I had no rest in 
iny spirit, (mind,) because I found not Titus, my 
brother." Acts 19 : 21, Paul " purposed in spirit, (in 
mirjd,) to go up to Jerusalem." There are many ex- 
amples of thi-s kind, that the reader will readily acknow- 
ledge ; such as Acts 20 : 22 : 1 TinL 4 : 12 j Phil.*'l ; 7; 
I Chron. 5 : 26 ; EccL 1 : 17 ; &a. 

104 BIBLE VS. TRADITiarr. 

" MIND." 

"We could have given a table, where the heart is 
used for the mind in nine hundred and fifty-five places. 
Dan. 7 : 15, "I,, Daniel, was grieved in my spirit in 
the midst of my body, and the visions of my head 
troubled me." The heart often means the midst ; and 
seven times is so translated. Exod. 28 : 3, " Speak 
unto all that are wise-hearted, (wise-minded,) whom I 
have filled with the spirit of wisdom ;" (mind of wisdom.) 
Exod. 35 : 21, " And they came, every one whose heart 
stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made 
willing." Here heart, mind, and spirit, e\ddently mean 
the same. In 21 ver. it says, " their spirit made them 
willing ;" in 29 ver. '^tbat their heart made them wil- 
ling." Eom. 5 : 5, '' Because the love of God is shed 
abroad in our hearts." 2 Cor. 1 : 22, " Who hath also 
sealed us, and given the earnest of the spirit in our 
hearts." Gal. 4 : 6^ " G^od. hath sent forth the spirit of 
his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father." Rom. 
8 : 16, " This selfsame spirit, beareth witness with our 
spirits, that v/e are the children of God." Thus our 
adoption into the family of God,, is evidenced in three 
places to the hearty and o-nly once to the spirit. Cer- 
tainl}^, then,, this testimony is not made to a ghost- 
Where the heart, and soul, and spirit are used in the 
same connection, the heart is put first, as having the 
pre-eminence. AVhy ? The heart represents the afiec- 
tions of the mind ; the spirit, the rational faculties of 
the mind ; and the soul^ the whole person. Mark 12 : 
30, " Thou Shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy 
hearty and with all thy soul^ and with all thy mind, and 
with all thy strength^ Now, it would be just as reason- 
able to infer that the heart was a separate living entity, 
and had a separate conscious existence, and was immor- 
tal, as it would be to say the same thing of either soul 
or spirit. Nay, more reasonable, than to talk of '' death- 
less spirits," because the heart is susceptible of life, 
while the spirit is not. In Ps. 69 : 32, '' And your 
heart shall live that seek God ;" and,Ps. 22 : 26, " They 
shall praise the Lord that seek him : your heart shall 


live for ever." But where is life attributed to these 
fabulous " deathless spirits ?" 

We will pause a little, in the progress of our investi- 
gation of spirit ; and proceed to examine a few texts of 
a different class. We have denied the separate con- 
scious existence of the spirit of man. We have already 
proved that spirit has many meanings. 

1 Cor. 2 : 11, " For what man knoweth the things of 
a man, save the spirit of a man that is in him ? Even 
so the things of God knoweth no man, but the spirit of 
God." It is here clearly implied that knowledge belongs 
to the man, and the spirit is not the man, but is in the 
man. Is not the spirit here, the mind and conscious- 
ness ? The meaning seems to be, that, as only the man 
himself is conscious of the plans and intentions of his 
own mind, and no other man can know them, unless he 
reveal them ; so God alone is conscious of the workings 
of his own mind, and the spirit of God alone can reveal 
his purposes, and the hidden things of God. But read 
Harwood's translation: 10 v. "But to us hath God 
been pleased to reveal by his spirit these glorious dis- 
coveries ; for the spirit explores all things, and dives 
into the profound depths of the divine counsels." 11 v. 
^' For as it is the mind alone of one man that judges of 
the temper and disposition of another : so it is the spirit 
of God that is acquainted with the measures and desigias 
of the Supreme." 

2 Cor. 4 : 13, " We have the same spirit of faith .... 
knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus, shall 
raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present us with you. 
.... For which cause we faint not ; for though our 
outward man perish, yet the inward [man] is renewed 
day by day." It is evident here, that Paul's hope was 
founded upon the resurrection of the dead, and not in 
the possession of a something that could be abstracted 
from himself But what is this something ? for man is 
not in the Greek. The disposition and mind of God 
and Christ. It was the spirit of " Christ formed within 
him, the hope of glory." Col. 1 : 27. It was " the 
hidden man of the heart," of 1 Pet. 3:4. In Eph. 3 : 
16, Paul prays that God may grant you " To be 
strengthened with might by his spirit in the inner man," 


which he immediately explains, " That Christ may dwell 
in your hearts by faith." In Rom. 7 : 22, Paul makes 
his mind, or rational faculties, the " inward man." 


Num. 14 : 24, " Caleb had another spirit;" a different 
disposition. Pro v. 16 : 32, " He that ruleth his spirit, 
(his temper,) is better than he that taketh a city." Pro v. 
17:27, "A man of understanding is of an excellent 
spirit;" (temper.) 1 Cor. 4: 21, '' Shall I come unto 
you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meek- 
ness ?" (in a mild temper.) Eph. 4 : 23, " And be 
renewed in the spirit, (disposition,) of your mind." But 
it is needless to quote further. We will name a few of 
the spirits that dwell in man : the Spirit of God— of 
Christ — of love — of power — of grace — of judgment — of 
knowledge — of wisdom — of a sound mind— of your 
mind — of faith — of fear — of bondage — -a meek spirit — a 
quiet spirit — a spirit of supplication — a spirit of the world 
— a spirit of slumber — a spirit of ant i- Christ, &c., &c. 
As it would be easy to enumerate fifty or sixty different 
spirits in man, we might ask our opponents are all these 
immortal ghosts ? Surely man might be called legion^ 
for he is many. Or, if they demur, we might ask them, 
which of these spirits belonging to man is '' deathless ?" 


This is an unusual meaning of the word, and we shall 
quote every place where we think it occurs in this sense. 
I John 4 : 1-5, " Believe not every spirit, (person,) but 
try the spirits, (persons,) whether they be of God. Be- 
cause many false prophets, (propounders of false doc- 
trines,) have gone out into the world. They are of the 
world : therefore speak they of the world, aiid the world 
heareth tJiemy These spirits are real tangible persons, 
which every person may readily see and hear, in these 
days of theological fables. Eight times in this chapter 
is spirit used for the person. Heb. 12: 9, ^' Shall we 
not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits^ 
and live ?" Ver. 22. " But ye are come unto Mount Zion, 
and to the spirits of just men made perfect." 


These spirits are certainly persons belonging to the true 
Church. See 2 Thes. 2 : 2 ; 1 Cor, 5 : 5. So 1 Pet. 3 : 
19. Those to whom Noah preached, "the spirits that 
are now in sepulchres ;" (see Syriac version,) were the 
antedeluvians, Hving in his day, and eight of these souls, 
or spirits, entered into the ark and saved their lives ; 
and the rest of the spirits were drowned in the flood. 
These same spirits, or persons, are probably alluded to 
again, 1 Pet. 4 : 6, " Por this cause was the gospel 
preached to them that are dead ;" (the spirits to whom 
Noah- preached.) If they are meant, then are they dead 
spirits^ or persons. So thought Milton. But the verse 
is by no means clear. 





This is an important question, and we are now fully 
prepared to answer it. "We have distinctly defined, from 
the Bible, what is the spirit of man. Primarily^ that it 
is a principle of life contained in the breath ; 2ndly, That 
the container is put for the contained, that it is breath ; 
3rdly, That as none of the results of life can take place 
without the animating principle, so the various tempers 
and faculties of the mind are called spirit. But spirit, 
though it be the cause of life, is not life itself, and al- 
though a subtle agent, it cannot manifest any of the 
powers of life in an abstracted state. But with the spirit, 
an organized breathing frame is enabled by God to mani- 
fest the energies of hfe. It is therefore the flesh that 
lives, the body that lives, and the spirit does not live at 
all ! Hence the terms, mortal flesh, mortal body, and 
mortal man ; these can live, and these can die. But the 
spirit, not being an organized substance, can neither live 
nor die — is neither mortal nor immortal. So, as the 
spirit of man has never lived, it can never be said to die. 
Hence this spirit is never said to die, or to be killed, but 
" to be gathered" by God ; " to go to God" ; " to be 
taken away" ; to be '^ cut off" ; to be ^' blown out" ; to 
" go forth" ; to be " breathed out" ; to be '' expired" ; 
to be " put out" ; and such like expressions are used re- 
specting it. 

It is eaid to be the Spirit of God ; and sometimes 


called the breath of God. Job 34 : 14, " If God set his 
heart upon man, if he gather unto himself his spirit and 
his breath ; all flesh shall perish together, and man shall 
turn again unto dust." It is God's spirit and God's 
breath by which men live, which is gathered to himself 
again. Ps. 104:29, "Thou hidest thy face, they are 
troubled : thou takest away their (nesme) breath, they 
die^ and return to their dust. Thou sendest forth thy 
{ruah) spirit, they are created : and thou renewest the 
face of the earth." Ps. 146 : 4, " His {nesme) breath 
goethforth^ he returneth to the earth ; in that very day 
his thoughts perish." 

A writer in the Methodist Quarterly Review for April, 
1852, endeavors to avert the force of this text by a criti- 
cism on the word " thoughtsy Suppose that word were 
entirely stricken out of the text, then if he (the man) 
" returneth to his earth," it necessarily follows that all 
that belongs to him as man must perish ; including, of 
course, his thoughts. Can dust think ? But the word 
is eshtonhouth^ thoughts, purposes, resolutions ; and oc- 
curs in Job 12 : 5, where it cannot mean the result of 
thought, as our critic argues, but must mean thought or 
imagination. " He that is ready to slip with his feet, is 
as a lamp despised in the thought of him that is at ease." 
Isa. 57 : 16, " I will not contend for ever, neither will I 
be always wroth : for the (ruah) spirit should fail before 
me, and the {nesme) breath which I have made." But, 
as if to make this matter doubly plain, we find in Job 12 : 
10, For in God's " hand is the nephesh (soul or hfe) of 
every living thing, and the (rz^a^) spirit of all mankind." 
And the much abused text, Eco. 12 : 5-7, confirms this 
view. When " man goeth to his long home.".. ..verse 7, 
" Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was : and 
the {(ruah) spirit (or their breath) shall return to God 
who gave it. Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher ; all 
is vanity." Could the preacher mean that a " deathless 
spirit" going to God, was vanity, nothingness ? No, but 
when the breath returned to God, as it came from God, 
a simple principle of life, the man himself, and all that 
appertained to him, was notb^ogncss — -a vapor that pass- 
eth away. Where is the difference between the expres- 
sion '' the spirit goes to God," and " God gathers the 
spirit," in the preceding quotation ? The man himself in 


both cases '' returneth to his earth." Ecc. 8:8," There 
is no man hath power over the (ruah) spirit, to retain, 
the ruahy neither hath he power in the day of death." 

But to close every objector's mouth, we find that the 
same writer who said the spirit goes to God who gave 
it, hkewise says, that there is no difference between the 
spirit of a man, and the spirit of beasts ; and the uniform 
testimony of Scripture is, that w^hen God takes aw^ay 
this spirit, the whole man, with all his rational powders, 
is reduced to dust, and perishes. We shall give the 
sense of Ecc. 3 : 18, as best we can, and let the reader 
compare. " I said in my heart concerning the sons of 
(anosheem) mortals, that God w^ould {borah) search them, 
and show^ to them, that they are like the beasts. There- 
fore the death of man, and the death of beasts are alike ; 
and the condition of them both is equal : as man dieth, 
so they also die : all creatures have one [ruah) spirit ; 
and man hath nothing more than beast : all creatures are 
subject to vanity and decay, and all go to one place : of 
dust they w^ere all made, and into dust they all return 
together. Who knoweth that the (ruah) spirit, or 
breath, of the children of Adam ascendeth ? and that 
the {ruah) spirit, or breath, of the beast descendeth to 
the earth ?" The Hebrew emphatically declares that 
the ruah of men and of beasts is the same ; that they are 
both alike ; that at death they both descend into the 
earth. And Solomon seems to pray that God would 
show to men their mortal nature ; and challenges any of 
them to point out a particle of difference in their spirit. 
The translators have translated the word ruah, breathy 
in the 19th verse, and spirit in the 21st verse. Was this 
honest ? 

Will the reader please to note that all creatures have 
ONE spirit, not each one a separate, individual spirit, or 
ghost. But a man has no pre-eminence in death above 
the beasts. But this would not be truth, if a man were 
favored with a conscious spirit that could survive his 
body. The man, as a whole, and the beasts alike return 
to dust. This text seems to be so framed as to prevent 
the possibility of evading its force. Eeader, do you be- 
lieve it ? The spirit of inspiration includes specifically 
ALL the parts of man, his body and his spirit. Eeader, 
dare you except a part from death where God makes no 


exw option ? In the light of this testimony, what becomes 
of ine " deathless spirit" ? 

We now refer to a few of the simihtudes that are used 
for spirit^ and show their agreement with our previous 
deductions. Pro v. 20 : 27, " The spirit of man is the 
(nair) lamp of the Lord, searching all the inward parts.'* 
Prov. 13 : 9, " The light of the righteous rejoiceth : but 
the {nair) lamp of the wicked shall be ^^ put out.''^ Pr. 
20 : 20, " Whoso curseth his father or his mother, his 
(nair) lamp shall be ' put out'' in obscure darkness ^ 
Pr. 24 : 20, " There shall be no reward to the evil man ; 
the {nair) lamp of the wicked shall \)Q put out?'' Job 
18 : 5, '* Yea, the light of the wicked shall be ^ put out^ 
and the spark of his fire shall ' not shine? " " The light 
shall be dark in his tabernacle, and his {nair) lamp shall 
be ^ put out'' WITH HIM." Job 21 : 17, " How oft is the 
{nair) lamp of the wicked ' put out'' ? and how oft 
cometh their destruction upon them?'' Ps. 76 : 12, " He 
shall ' cut off"' the spirit of princes." We have transla- 
ted nair^ uniformly, lamp. Now substitute the word 
" spirit^^ as is meant, where light, lamp, and spark are 
found ; and how plainly we are taught that the spirit of 
man is unconscious when separated from him. It is 
^'' put ouV ; ^'' put out in obscure darkness'''' ; "shall not 
shine" ; " his [spirit] shall be put out with him?'' Such 
language can no way be made compatible with the sepa- 
rate conscious existence of the spirit. 

But there are other strong jBgurative expressions taken 
from the identity of the principle of life to wind. Ps. 78 : 
39, " For he remembered that they were but flesh ; a 
{ruah) wind, or spirit, that passeth away, and cometh 
720^ again?'' Ps. 103 : 14, " Godknoweth our frame ; he 
remembereth that we are but dust. As for man, his 
days are as grass : as a flower of the field, so he flourish- 
eth. For the {ruah) wind passeth over it, and it is 
gone ; and the place thereof shall know it no more." 
Jas. 4 : 14, " For what is your life ? It is even a vapor, 
that appeareth for a little time^ and then vanisheth 
away?'' Job 7:7, " O remember that my hfe is {ruah) 
wind." Isa. 41 : 23, 29, The prophet addressing tlie 
idols calls upon them to " Show the things that are to 
coifte hereafter, that w^e may know that ye are gods ; 
yea do good or do evil that we may be dismayed, and 


behold it together. Behold ye are worse than nothing." 
And speaking of the men of Jerusalem, he says their 
molten images, are ruah^ wind, and confusion. Here 
we may see, that instead of the {ruah) spirit, imparting 
a principle of immortality to man, exactly the reverse is 
the truth ; and because man is dependent upon the (ruah) 
spirit, for life, therefore is he mortal, and vanity, and 
fading as a flower of the field. 

We hope that enough has been said to convince every 
man, that man has no spirit that can have a separate 
conscious existence. We believe it impossible for a can- 
did man to review the mass of evidence we have pro- 
duced, and not perceive the fallacy of the prevailing notion 
of the separate conscious existence of the spirit of man. 

Paul had taught that Christians are justified by the 
belief of a gospel which had been preached unto Abra- 
ham four hundred and thirty years before the giving of 
a law of works : " ex ergon nomon^^ should be read, ex 
nomon ergon ; and that this law of works could not an- 
nul the law of faith in the gospel, or law of liberty. By 
what law are we justified ? By a law " of works" ? 
" Nay; but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude 
that a man is justified" by (obedience to a law of liberty, 
or royal law, or what Paul calls a law of) faith, apart 
from, (or without) a law of works." This doctrine had 
been misunderstood and been perverted, and made to 
mean that men were justified without obedience. But 
in James 2:17, 26, the apostle argues, that faith and 
works united were indispensably necessary to constitute 
that active faith, by which the justified shall have life. 
That either one without the other is dead. As it is of 
no use to say, we wish well to men, and yet are unwill- 
ing to assist them ; " Even so faith, if it hath not works, 
is dead, being by itself." And he closes his argument 
by this simile : " For as the body without the (pneuma) 
spirit J is dead ; so faith without works is dead also." 
That is, that as the union of body and spirit , was indis- 
pensably necessary to constitute man a living being, so 
tho. union of faith and works was likewise necessary to 
constitute a living faith, or that faith to which the pro- 
mise of life was attached. Now if we could in truth say, 
that the spirit can live apart from the body, we should 
overturn the masterly argument of the apostle, and make 


him affirm that wcn'ks disunited from faith^ would entitle 
man to justification and life. So we argue, That as the 
body without the spirit is dead ; so the spirit without 
the body is dead also. 


Can the mind exercise its powers separately from the 
body, or man ? Or, are the dead unconscious ? We 
have shown that spirit sometimes means the mind. Al- 
though the words mind and spirit, may not occur in the 
following passages, yet they plainly teach, that the opera- 
tion of the spirit, of the mind, or of the rational powers, 
become entirely extinct in death ; and that the separated 
spirit or principle of life, is utterly incapable, of mental 
action, of knowledge, or of consciousness ; and that the 
whole man with all his powers of knowledge, and con- 
sciousness, is inoperative, is entirely devoid of thought 
and feeling ; and that the whole man is in the (keve^-) 
grave, or in {sheol, equal to the Greek hadeSj) the state 
of death. That is, some of the dead are in the kever ; 
but all the dead are in sheol. Consequently the mind 
and spirit have no separate conscious existence. But to 
the proof. In Ecc. 9 : 10, " Whatsoever thy hand find- 
eth to do, do it with thy might ; for there is no work^ nor 
device^ nor knowledge^ nor wisdom^ in sheol ^ the state of 
the dead, ivhither thou goest^ We quote this passage 
because it teaches that all men go to sheol^ and that 
there is no knowledge there. A full description of sheol 
is reserved till we examine the hell of the Scriptures. 

We will examine David's testimony. He says, Psa. 
119: 175, "Let my soul live ^ audit &\i2i)L\ praise thee." 
Why David ? Cannot your soul praise God when sepa- 
rated from the body, and you are dead and buried ? We 
will let David answer. Ps. 115: \7 ^ ^'' Thii dead praise 
not the Lord^ neither any that go down into silenced 
And again ; Ps. 6:4," O Lord, deliver my souP^ (from 
sickness). " For in death there is 7io remembrance oj 
thee : in sheol, (the grave, or state of death) who shall 
give thee thanks ?^^ We give the Hebrew and Greek 
words translated ^ra^c, pit, and hell, that the reader may 
perceive the sense in which they are used. Where the 
word soul occurs, if we do not give the original word, it 


is in every case in Hebrew, nephesh^ and in Greek, 

We will give an analysis of the 88th Psalm, extracting 
such parts as are applicable to our purpose : " Lord 
God of my salvation .... incline thine ear unto my cry ; 
for my {nephesh^) soul^ is full of troubles ; and my life 
draweth nigh unto the {kever^) grave. I am [already] 
(esteemed as one of) them that go down into the pit : 
1 am as a man that hath no strength : free among the 
deacl^ like the slain that he in the {kever^) grave^ whom 
thou reviemherest no more : and they are cut off from 

thy hand Lord, I have called daily upon thee . . . 

Wilt thou show wonders to the dead ? Shall the dead 
arise and praise thee ! Shall thy loving-kindness be 
declared in the (kever) grave ? or thy faithfulness (ava- 
doun^j in a place of destruction ? Shall thy wonders be 
known in the dark ? and thy righteousness in the land 
of forgetfulness .?" David evidently expected that he 
himself, his soul, would go into the grave, and that when 
there, he would be cut off from the hand, and the 
remembrance of God, that the grave was a place of 
darkness, of forgetfulness, of destruction ; and by a 
series of emphatic questions, he declares that there is no 
knowledge, or consciousness there, and the dead praise 
not the Lord. In Ps. 30 : 2-9, David speaks to the 
same effect. But here, lest they should spoil their 
Pagan traditions, the translators have rendered sheol^ 
which means the state of death^ by grave^ and shokhath, 
destruction^ by pit. But we shall endeavor to correct 
their translation, even though our correction should un- 
cover a dead soul. Remember, David is praising God, 
whose " favor is life," for having dehvered him from 
death. ^' O Lord, my God, I cried unto thee, and thou 
hast healed me. O Lord thou hast brought up my 
(nephesh^) soul, from (sheol,) death ; thou hast kept me 

alive, that I should not go down to the (hour,) pit 

I cried to thee, O Lord .... What profit is there in my 
blood, when / go down to {shokhatk,) destruction ? 
Shall the dust praise thee ? shall it declare thy truth ? 
.... Thou hast turned for me my mourning into dancing; 
to the end that my glory (or tongue) may sing praise to 
thee, and not be silent." Here David uses interchange- 
ably his soul and himself, and expected that himself 


would go to destruction, and become dust; and con- 
trasts his state when dead to his state while living. 
While living he could praise God ; but when dead, he 
significantly asks, Can dust praise God ? Say you ; 
Surely the soul of David could not die ! Hear him 
speaking, then, in the person of a greater than himself, 
m the 16th Psalm, " Because the (Lord) is at my right 
hand, I shall not be moved. Therefore my heart is glad, 
and my glory rejoiceth : vay flesh also shall rest in hope. 
For thou wilt not leave my (nephesh^) soul^ in [sheol^) the 
state of death ; neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One 
to see corruption, [But] thou wilt show me the path of 
life." David strongly expresses the entire extinction of 
the whole being of man, including the operations of his 
mind, in Ps. 146 : 3, ^' Put not your trust in princes, nor 
in the son of (odom^) a man of earth, in whom there is 
no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his 
earthy in that very day his thotj gkts perish.'*^ 

But we will take the testimony of Peter and Paul, 
and ascertain whether David was justified in his opinions 
regarding his soul returning to dust again, and himself 
ceasing to be conscious. Acts 2 : 29, " Men and 
brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch 
David, that he is both dead and buried^ and his sepul- 
chre is with us unto this day." 34 v. " For David is 
not ascended into the heavens." 13 : 36, "For David, 
after he had served his own generation by the will of 
God, fell on sleep and was laid to his fathers, and saw 
corruption " Yea ; his soul has been left in [sheol- 
kades^) the state af deaths and has seen corruption^ and 
therefore he can no longer praise God, till he awakes in 
the likeness of the Savior, and his " corruption puts on 
incorruption," and '' when Christ who is our life^ shall 
appear, (in the clouds of heaven,) then shall he also ap- 
pear in glory with him." Col. 3 : 4. Well might David 
exclaim, Ps. 119 : 175, " Let my soul live, and it shall 
praise thee." For prophesying of death he says, Ps. 22 : 
15, '' Thou hast brought me into the dust of death.'''' 
Again, Ps. 31 ; 17, " Let the wicked be silent in sheol?'' 
Or, interpreting this language prophetically, " The 
wicked shall be silent in (sheol^ death.'''' David's testi- 
mony, on other points, will be found in its appropriate 


Solomon says, Ecc. 9, " There is one event to the 
righteous, and to the wicked.. ..To him that is joined to 
all the living there is hope : for a living dog is better 
than a dead liony [Why, Solomon, is the most insigni- 
ficant creature while alive, better than the most noble 
creature, including man, when he is dead ?] " For the 
living knoiv that they shall die : but the dead knoio not 
anything^ neither have they," [mark, I speak of present 
time, while they remain dead, neither have they] any 
more a reward ; for the {zaikher) memorial of them is 
forgotten. Also their love^ and their hatred ^ and their 
envy^ is noio perished; neither have they any more 
(khailek) a part (le-oulom) during the whole period of 
theif death, in any [work] that is done under the sun.... 
Live joyfully [therefore] with the wife whom thou lovest 
all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given 
thee under the sun ; all the days [I say] of thy vanity : 
[for the period of thy conscious existence in the present 
state of things, or things under this sun, is but a shadow, 
and is quickly passing away :] for that is thy portion in 
this life^ and in thy labor which thou takest under the 
sun. [And because Hfe, or this life, or while you are 
living, is the only period of knowledge, enjoyment, or la- 
bor ; or, as I said before, of love, of hatred, and of envy, 
till the final consummation ; or, until you are raised again 
to life ; therefore] Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, 
do it with {kouakh) energy ; for there is no work, nor 
device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in (sheol) the state 
of the dead, whither thou goe.-t." 

The whole passage is sufficiently strong without our 
interlineations in brackets. They are added, not to make 
assurance doubly sure ; but to call attention to the argu- 
ment of the preacher, and because the vindicators of Pa- 
gan traditions are galled under this plainly spoken lan- 
guage ; for an attempt has been made by those " who 
receive not the love of the truth," to wrest this whole 
passage from its most obvious import. First, they deny 
that Solomon had any reference to the state of the dead, 
as dead me?ij and in sheol ; and they falsely assume that 
he meant only to state, that the bodies of the dead in the 
grave, have no connection with earthly things, and have 
DO knowledge there ! ! And that he does not here, and 
in chapter 3: 17-21, teach that there are no conscious 


" disembodied spirits," and that we may not infer that 
the poetical " spirit land," exists only in the imagination ; 
and therefore that the dogma of the separate existence 
of conscious spirits, is no way affected by Solomon's de- 
clarations ! ! And secondly, they charge Solomon with 
ignorance, and infidelity, respecting the state of the dead, 
and the future resurrection ! ! 

To the first objection we reply, that in the very place 
" whither thou goest^''^ be it where it may, but which 
Solomon affirms to be " sheol^'^ there is no knowledge^ nor 
device; and that the dead — wherever they be — ^^ know 
not anything?^ Moreover, if there be a '' spirit land," 
where the disembodied spirits of men are conscious ; 
then are Solomon, David, Isaiah, Job, Peter, and Paul, 
found false witnesses before God ; for they all plainly 
testify to the unconsciousness of the dead. To the se- 
cond objection, the charge preferred against Solomon of 
ignorance and infidelity, we reply that it comes with a 
bad grace from those who quote Solomon as their best 
authority^ as teaching, as they aver in Ecc. 12 : 7, the 
separate conscious existence of the spirit of man. We 
aflftrm that it is no reproach to the wisdom of Solomon 
to be ignorant of a Pagan fable that did not become pre- 
valent in the world, until five hundred years after his 
death. The charge of infidelity against Solomon, we 
cannot help suspecting, is founded principally, in a desire 
to set aside his authority, and with the desire of support- 
ing popular tradition. It derives some little apparent 
plausibility from an attempted change of the present^ in- 
to the future time : making the phrase " neither have 
they," in the 5th and again in the 6th verse, to read 
" neither shall they have''' ; and disi'egarding the present 
time of the 6th verse, " is ^^o^d; perished." Again in dis- 
regarding the idiom of the preacher, in the phrase, " un- 
der the sun," which he makes equivalent to the present 
state of things. And still again, from the obviously 
wrong translation of the word 02^/o/7i, rendered "for ever," 
in verse 6th. The Hebrew word oulom.^ is equal to the 
Greek word aion^ and both refer to an age, or hmited 
period of time ; and when modified, or used as adverbs, 
or adjectives, they embrace the whole of the period re- 
ferred to in the context. But when these words refer to 
a thing in the abstract, that is not necessarily limited ; 


they then imply duration as long as that thing shall ex- 
ist. For instance, when Jonah is made to say, *' The 
earth with her bars was about me for ever''^ ; it means 
the whole of the period that Jonah was in the whale ; 
but that period is limited to three days and three nights. 
So when Paul is made to say, tr., Philemon, 15th verse. 
' For perhaps he therefore departed for a seaso?iy that 
thou shouldst receive him /or ever^^^ (aionion) ; it refers 
to the whole period that he was capable of service ; that 
is, for life; which period is contrasted with " season." 
So these words when applied to life, or destruction, in 
the abstract, as these are capable of endurance, and there 
is no other reference to a period, then do they imply 
that the state will be everlasting, in the English unlimit- 
ed sense of the term. Now then for the application. If 
Solomon had applied the term oulom to death, or to 
sheol — these terms not being limited in the context — 
then should the word oulom be translated for ever, or 
everlasting ; and Solomon would have been in direct op- 
position to Isa. 25:8; Hos. 13: 14; Mat. 16 : 18 ; 1 
Cor. 15 : 54, 55 ; and Eev. 20 : 14 ; and would have as- 
serted that death, and sheol, could never be destroyed — 
and therefore there would be no resurrection. But as 
Solomon refers to a period of time necessarily limited to 
the period while men have their portion in things 'under 
the sun,' so the word oulom, means during the whole of 
that period, and 7io more. Further remarks on these 
words will be found in the subsequent pages. After 
this, let there be no cavilling, nor evasion. Solomon de- 
clares that dead men have no knowledge — that the results 
of life and r)iind have become extinct with the man — 
that they have perished. The dead are opposed to the 
living, and whatever part of man lived and exercised the 
faculties of knowledge, and emotion, it is that part espe- 
cially that has ceased to know or feel. And ceased to 
know and feel, in that very state in which it noio may 
be. And now the captious objector may call that once 
knowing part, either body, mind, or spirit, it will avail 
him nought. 

More testimony concerning the unconsciousness of the 
dead. Job 14th chapter. 


19. " The waters wear away the stones, ^^JT^' 
The dust of the earth inundates her produce, ^^*^ 
And the hope of (enoush) mortal mail thou consumest. 

20. Thou prevailest against him (le-oulmn) continually, and he 

must pass away ; 
Thou wearest out his frame : and wilt send him away. 

21. His sons may come to honor, but he will not know it, 
And they may be reduced, but he will not discern them. 

22. His flesh shall drop from off him, 

And his soul shall become a waste from him." 

Isa. 63 : 18, " Doubtless thou art our father, though 
Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknoivledge us 
noty Luke 10: 23, Jesus said, "Blessed are the eyes 
which see the things that ye see : for I tell you, that 
many prophets and kings have desired to see those things 
which ye see, and have not seen them ; and to hear those 
things which ye hear, and have not heard themy Luke 
2 : 26, " It was revealed unto Simeon by the Holy 
Ghost, that he should not see death, until he should see 
the Messiah of the Lord." 28 ver. " Then he took (the 
child Jesus) in his arms, and blessed God, and said : My 
Lord, now release thy servant in peace, as thou hast 
said; for lo, my eyes have seen thy mercy." 

We have here the testimony of Job, Isaiah, and Jesus 
Christ, that the dead have no knowledge of what is 
passing upon the earth ; yea, they are ignorant of the 
most glorious events passing here, relative to their own 
redemption, much as they desired to see them ; they 
were necessarily precluded from the enjoyment of this 
desire, by their death prior to the manifestation of the 
Son of God. But the life-time of Simeon was protracted 
by special favor, that he might enjoy that desirable 
privilege ; and, having enjoyed it, he was ready to be 
released from life, knowing that he should be " born 
again," from among the dead ones into the kingdom, 
when the Messiah should appear the second time with- 
out a sin-offering to raise to life (eternal) all those that 
are anxiously expecting him. Luke 20 : 35 ; Heb. 9 : 
28 ; Col. ,3 : 4, He knew that " when Christ who is our 
life, SHALL APPEAR, (iu the clouds of heaven,) then should 
he also appear with him in glory." Luke 20 : 35 ; 
Heb. 9 : 28 / Col. 3:4. 

If any part of Moses survived him, why could not 


that surviving part have seen the l^nd of Canaan after 
he was dead, and thus have precluded the necessity 
of his going into a high mountain during his Hfe-time, 
that he might be favored with this view ? Deut. 32 : 48 ; 
34 : 1. 

As the Bible doctrine of the unconsciousness of the 
dead, has become very important, in these latter days of 
" new revelations" and " spiritual manifestations" of 
that wicked one, " whose coming is after the working 
of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, 
and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them 
that perish ; because they receive not the love of the 
truth, that they might be saved ;" 2 Thes. 2 : 9; — we 
shall bring forward more witnesses. 

We now produce the testimony of the Lord ; and we 
do most earnestly pray that the reader will give it a 
fcivorable hearing, Isaiah, the prophet, is sent unto 
liezekiah, and said : 38 c. " Thus saith the Lord, set 
thy house in order ; for thou shalt die, and not live .... 
Then liezekiah prayed unto the Lord .... Thus saith 
the Lord^ I have heard thy prayer ; . . . . behold, I will 
add unto thy days fifteen years^ This is the writing 
of Hezekiah, when he was recovered of his sickness ; 
" I said in the cutting off of my days, / shall go to the 
gates, (or be under the power) of the grave : / am de- 
prived of the residue of my years. I said, I shall not see 
the Lord, even the Lord, in the land of the living : 1 
shall behold man no more, with the inhabitants of the 

world." (But) " What shall I say ? Lord, 

thou hast, in love to my soul^ delivered it from the pit of 

corrujjtion For the grave cannot praise thee : 

death cannot celebrate thee : they that go down into the 
pit, cannot hope for thy truth. The living, the living, 
he shall praise thee, as I do this day." Isa. 38. 

As the Lord's message is expressed affirmatively— 
^' tlwu shalt die ,•" and negatively, *' and not live /" it - 
utterly precludes the possibility, that had Hezekiah 
died, he would have lived in heaven, or elsewhere. But 
^^ fifteen years]'' were added to his life. Can fifteen years 
be added to the life of an immortal soul ? Can it be 
deprived of the residue of its life ? Nay ; verily. Plad 
he died, ^ he would not have seen the Lord," neither 
would he have seen man, or the souls of men, any more, 


in this world, or in any other. For this is emphatically, 
^' the land of the living," which could not be the case, i'* 
his sold lived in another state of being. But further ,' 
his soul was dehvered from the grave, where it, (the 
soul,) would have experienced '^ corruption," but for 
such deliverance : for he says the dead cannot praise 
God, nor hope for his truth. Surely, this testimony 
needs no confirmation. When we reflect, that the 
prophets ^nd apostles, unversed in Pagan traditions, 
would have deemed it a work of supererogation, for- 
mally to attempt to prove that a dead man is a dead 
man^ and that they have alluded to the self-evidert fact 
only incidentally, in contrast with hfe, and to ur^^ us to 
*^ work while the day lasts, for the night come^> when 
no man can ivork ,•" we are astonished at the nass of 
evidence we have been able to collect 

isro CONSCIOUS spirit, or soul, survives the d ni op 


Under ttiis head we shall arrange a few mit? .ellaneous 
proofs ; and, though no soul, or spirit, or the operations 
of life, or mind, be specifically named in thsm ^ yet they 
will prove that the whole man, as a unit, becomes un- 
conscious in death ; and they are utterly irreconcilable 
with the dogma of the separate conscious existence of 
the spirit. We pass over, for the present, those nu- 
merous texts that speak of the utter extermination of 
the being of the wicked, as properly belonging to 
mother part of our subject, excepting where they eluci- 
late the argument before us. 

Josh. 1:1," The Lord spake unto Joshua . . . saying, 
IdLoses, my servant, is deadP Deut. 32 : 48, " And the 
Lord spake unto Moses .... saying, get thee up into 
ihis mountain Abarim, unto mount Nebo . , . . and be- 
hold the land of Canaan, .... and die in the mount, . . . 
and be gathered unto thy people." 34 : 1, '' And 
Moses went up . , . . And the Lord showed him all the 

land And the Lord said .... I have caused thee 

to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not go over 
thither. So Moses, the servant of the Lord, died there^ 
in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord. 
And he buried him in a valley, in the land of Moab, 


over against Beth-peor : but no man knoweth of liis 
sepulchre unto this day. And Moses was a hundred 
and twenty years old when he diedy To affirm that 
the essential part of Moses, the conscious and rational 
principle, the intelligent spirit of Moses^ continued to 
live, is to deny the veracity of God ! For if only the 
body died, leaving a living, conscious ghost, then evi- 
dently Moses himself did not die I and the prediction 
of God failed, and the account is not a true record of 
the transaction. The reader need not refer to Jude 9 : 
nor Luke 9 : 30 ; we shall &how in their place, that they 
have no reference to the transaction recorded above. 
The record says, Moses died. 

Job 14 : 10, " But {gever^) the strong man, {kholash^) 
is weakened and dieth : yea^ {odom^ the man of earth,, 
{govaj) is wasted away ; and where is he ?" [As] '* The 
waters have failed from the lake, and the flood is ex- 
hausted and dried up : [so] {eesh) the virtuous man 
lieth down, and riseth not again ; till the heavens be 
dissolved, they shall not awake, nor be (oor,) aroused 
out of their sleep." 

A few remarks upon the King's " most excellent" (?) 
translation, to which the reader is referred. There are 
three words/ in our quotation, each having a distinct 
meaning, which are all rendered by the single term 
" man ;" and the beautiful antithesis of the original, 
between strength and weakness, is disregarded, and 
likewise the correspondence between a man of earth, 
and the wasting again to earth, is entirely obliterated ia 
the common version ; because^ perhaps^ it teaches the 
dissolution of the man himself, and the necessary cessa- 
tion of his consciousness ; and then out of the word 
govUy " to waste away," the translators have shamefully 
manufactured the phrase, " giveth up the ghost,," which 
now conveys an essentially opposite idea. The idea of 
the original is, that the man, composed of frail materials^ 
is dissolved in death ; but the idea conveyed by the 
translation is* at least in the estimation of many, that 
the essential man, as a living ghost, or spirit, having a 
distinct and conscious being, has only been separated 
from a useless incumbrance of earth, sometimes called a 
" body," and is rejoicing in a more exalted living exist* 
ence ! Yet this is the translation which is so lauded to 


the skies, and palmed upon the unlearned as an authori- 
tative standard ! Why are these manifest perversions 
of the word of God permitted to continue ? Is learned 
sectarianism conscious that the original Scriptures, in 
their purity, cannot be made to countenance any one of 
their contradictory creeds ? If they really love truth, 
let them hasten to wipe away this reproach, by giving 
us the very best translation, conveying the very spirit of 
the original^ which the present advanced state of know- 
ledge, enables them to give. We have inserted the 
word " lake" for " sea," because the Hebrews were 
accustomed to call inland lakes, seas, and so, perhaps, 
Job ; the change agrees better with the context. 

Job asks the question, when a man is dead, " Where 
is he ?" And he answers it, by implying, that he no 
more exists, as a man, than the flood, evaporated by 
the sun, exists as a flood ; he is sleeping unconsciously 
in ^' the dust of death," till a change shall take place in 
the heavens and the earth, w^hen he shall suddenly start 
up at the sound of the trumpet of the * Prince of 
angels,' {archaggelon.) Again, 10: 18, ^* Why didst 
thou bring me forth from the womb ? I might (gova^) 
have wasted away, and no eye have seen me. I might 
have been, as though I had never existed ; have been 
carried from the womb to the grave." Gova is here 
translated '^ giveth up the ghost." But Job is very 
explicit, and declares of the state between death and 
the resurrection, that it is a state of non-existence, as 
animated beings, in any way whatever. 7 : 21, *' Since 
now I am about to repose in the dust, and thou shalt 
seek me^ but * J' shall not exist." Even God cannot 
And Job, when he is dead ! But, surely, God could 
have found his hving ghost, if he had had one. This 
language is very plain ; Job does not exist, and so God 
cannot find him^ till he raises him again. 

Jer. 15: 1, " Then said the Lord unto me, Though 
Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my mind could 
not be toward this people." Moses and Samuel stood 
before the Lord while they were upon the earth ; but 
they do not stand before him now ; therefore we con- 
clude that Moses and Samuel are not now alive in any 
place. Ez. 22 : 30, '* I sought for a man among them, 
that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap be- 


fore me for the land, that I should not destroy it : but I 
found none." Where then are Moses, and Daniel, and 
Job, if God cannot find them ? Ah, says Job, " Thou 
shalt seek me, but I shall not exist." 

Ps. 90 : 3, " Thou (shoov) nE-turnest {enoush) mortal 
man to (dako) to his original dust again ; and sayest, 
(shoov), ^etuvUy ye {benai adam) children of the ground." 
Dako^ means reduced, analized, broken in pieces. How 
strangely ignorant were all the prophets of the survivance 
of the conscious spirit ! ! ! Let us turn then to the apos- 
tles : surely they know something about the state of 
man between death and the resurrection ! ! But what is 
this we find in the New Testament ? Christ and the 
apostles, uniformly, without a single exception, point 
forward to a specific period as the time when the saints 
shall be rewarded. They point to a second appearing of 
Christ, when he shall personally come in the clouds of 
heaven ; to a resurrection out from among the dead ones. 
2 Tim 4 : 7, '' I have kept the faith : hencelbrth there is 
laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, 
the righteous judge, shall give me at that day : and not to 
me only, but unto all them that love his appearing." Mat. 
19 : 28, " Verily I say to you, that you who have follow- 
ed me, w^hen the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of 
his glory in the renewed age, (regeneration,) ye also shall 
eit on twelve seats, ruling the twelve tribes of Israel." 
" When he shall appear^ we shall be like him." 

Of the patriarchs, it is said, Heb. 11 : 13, " All these 
died in faith, not having received the promises." 1 Thes. 
4: 15, That the saints that are dead, shall but just pre- 
cede those that happen to be hving when Christ comes. 
John 3 : 13, " No man hath ascended up to heaven, but 
he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man." 
The clause, " who is in heaven," is not in the most ancient 
MSS., and is probably the production of some officious 
transcriber. Will the reader read carefully the whole of 
1 Cor. 15: 16, 17. "If the dead rise not^ a/irHf Christ 
be not raised [from the dead :] ye are yet in your sins." 
That is, if ye are not raised again from a state of nothing- 
ness to hfe, ye are still under the sentence, * dust thou 
art and unto dust shalt thou return,' and there is no 
remedy for you. Verse 18, " Then they also who have 
fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only 


we have hope in Christ we are of all men most misera- 
ble." Here Paul predicates the whole of the future ex- 
istence of man upon a resurrection from the dead. If 
there be no resurrection, there will be no future conscious 
existence of any kind. If the ghosts of the righteous are 
conscious, and in glory, Paul would not have asserted 
that they hsiW (3 j^erished ? His language cannot be recon- 
ciled in any way with the dogma of the conscious sepa- 
rate existence of the spirit. Ah ! but did not Paul say? 
— Be patient, my dear reader, we shall hear what Paul 
says, bye and by. — We will pass on to the 29th verse. 
This verse has been obscured by passing through the 
hands of transcribers, who, perhaps, being thoroughly 
imbued with the Pagan notion of the separate existence 
of the spirit, could not make it accord with their creed. 
Macknight could render the verse thus — " Else what 
shall they do, who are baptized (in the hope of a resur- 
rection from) the dead, if the dead rise not ? Why are 
they then baptized for the dead ?" Harwood — " Other- 
wise, if the dead are never to be reanimated, how forlorn 
must be their hope, who were baptized in the firm as- 
surance of a glorious resurrection from the dead ! and 
upon these principles, why are persons baptized at ail 
into the belief of the future restoration of the pious dead 
to immortality?" Penn, "What will they who are baptized, 
gain more than [all the other dead,] if the dead rise not 
at all ?" We could give more translations, but till the 
text is cleared of its difficulties, it avails little. But in 
every way it makes the righteous as nothing without a 
resurrection ; and so there are no separate conscious 
spirits. Verse 30, " And why [upon the supposition that 
there is no resurrection] should we expose ourselves to 
peril every hour ?" Again, verse 32, " If, as amongst 
men, I was cast to wild beasts at Ephesus ; what did it 
profit me, if the dead rise not ? ' Let us eat and drink, 
for to-morrow we die.' " Here it is quite evident that 
Paul placed all his hope of any existence beyond the 
grave upon the resurrection of the dead. If there be no 
resurrection, then as in verse 19, this is the only state in 
which we exist, and it would be wise to make the most 
of the perishing pleasures of this life, for it is all our 
portion. But suppose Paul had any idea of the separate 
existence of the spirit, could he have used language like 


this ? "Would it not have been absolutely false ? For 
upon the supposition that the soul, or spirit, as a con- 
scious beino-, could possess enjoyment without the body, 
it would aftbrd a very great inducement to live so as 
to attain unto this enjoyment, even though the body 
should never be raised. But let it be always kept in 
mind that the reunion of a " never dying soul," which 
has never ceased its consciousness, to a reanimated body, 
is not a resurrection of the dead^ in any sense. Paul 
speaks here of the " resurrection of the dead ;" but ob- 
viously the person resurrected must first die ; or there 
could be no restoration to life. Would not Paul have 
reproved any man in his day, if they had shamefully per- 
verted his phrase " Resurrection of the dead ;'^'* into the 
phrase " Ileunion of soul and body'''' — so flippantly used 
in these days of fables — with the appropriate though cut- 
ting rebuke, verse 36, " Foolish man ! The seed which 
thou sow est is not re-enlivened unless it die." Mark the 
nervous questions of Paul. Mark his points. " If the 
DEAD BE not raised" ] thcu, 1. The pious dead, who are 
asleep, have already perished ; 2. Then our only hope is 
in this life; 3. Then, faithful Christians are the most 
miserable of all men ; 4. Then, the purpose of Christ in 
dying for us, has been frustrated ; 5. Then, our baptism 
has been in vain ; 6. Then, w^hy should w^e expose our- 
selves to peril ? 7. Then, of what advantage is this ex- 
posure to peril ? 8. Then, it would be wisdom to make 
the best of the very few fleeting moments of our exis- 
tence in this world ; and 9. Then, when w^e have made 
the most of the present life, we die ; we die, and that is 
the final end of us ! ! All these conclusions grow neces- 
sarily out of the supposition, in Paul's mind, that there 
is not to be a positive resurrection or restoration of un- 
conscious dead men to life again. All these legitimate 
deductions are utterly incompatible with the separate 
conscious existence of either soul or spirit. 

The more conclusively to prove that these nine deduc- 
tions, necessarily result from the erroneous assertion of 
some in those days, " That there is no resurrection of 
the dead," (12th v.) Paul goes on to explain the nature 
of man, and proves that all the life which we naturally 
possess, is derived from a man made of earth, who was 
only a *' hving soul," or a living animal ; for the meaning 


is exactly the same. And, as the father was only of an 
earthly, mortal, and corruptible nature, so must be all 
his childi'en. If we have nothing but what has been 
derived from God, through the first Adam, we shall 
necessarily perish in the corruption derived from our 
earthly father : death will be the everlasting end of us. 
But the christian is to derive his future perpetual con- 
scious existence, not through his present animal nature, 
but through a spiritual, or incorruptible nature, pro- 
cured for him by the " author, archegtyro, (of this 
kind,) of life," whom the Jews killed, but ^' whom God 
rais^ed from the dead ;" Acts 3 : 15. And, before we 
can procure this incorruptible nature, we " must be 
born again," from the dead ; for that " which is born of 
the ilesh, is flesh," and " Plesh and blood cannot inherit 
the kingdom of God." How can a decaying nature, 
inherit an undecaying kingdom ? And Paul, reason- 
ing thus, exclaims, 1 Cor, 15 : 46, ^' Howbeit that was 
NOT FIRST which is spiritual^ but that which is natural ; 
(or, animal ; that is, soul-like;) and afterward, that 
which is spiritual." As though he had said, no man 
can derive any spiritual — that is, incorruptible, and im- 
mortal — nature, Irom a father, who himself was made 
only of dust * and so the first nature — the only one we 
, are at present in the enjoyment of— is not pn&iimatikon^ 
a spiritual, that is, an immortal nature^ but is only 
psuchikon^ an animal nature ; and afterwards, when 
we are raised from the dead, then Christians, and 
Christians only^ will possess an immortal nature ; " For," 
he argues, •" when the trumpet shall sound," the dead 
in Christ, that sleep, " shall be raised incorruptible." 
53 v., " For this corruptible must put on incorruption, 
jind this mortal must put on immortality." Now, death 
has the dominion ; but when this is accomphshed, then 
^' death will be absorbed in victory." Mark, my 
reader : those who are now corruptible, and now mortal, 
are to put on something which they do not now possess ; 
that is, incorruptibility, which is immortahty. If it 
could be proved that man has about him natui'ally, or 
derived from any source whatever, any principle — call 
it body, soul, or spirit, — which, in this present state, is 
incorruptible and immortal, it would overturn tho 
masterly argument of the apostle. We are all, there- 


fore, perisliing creatures, and the sentence has gone out 
against every man : " Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt 
thou return/^ We are all condemned to death ; and if 
God has conferred upon any of us '^ the hope of eternal 
life," and given us the earnest of his spirit, that " Life 
is hid with Christ in God : and when Christ, our life^ 
shall appear, then shall we also appear with him ia 
glory." From the first Adam comes a complete cessa- 
tion of conscious existence ; but, through the second 
Adam, only Christians w^ill be renewed to an everlasting 
conscious existence ; while the wicked will be utterly 
destroyed for ever ; totally exterminated, root and 
branch ; blotted out of existence for ever. 

But, " Blessed be God, the Father of our Lord Jesus^ 
the Messiah, who, in his great mercy, has begotten us- 
aneWy by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus ^ the Mes- 
siah, to the HOPE OF LIFE, and to an inheritance incor- 
ruptible, undefiled, and unfading, which is [reserved for 
us,] in [the kingdom of J heaven ; while [we] are kept, 
by the power of God and by faith, for the life that is 
prepared, and tvill be revealed in the last times." 
(Translation of the Syriac^ 1 Pet. 1 : 3, excepting what 
is enclosed in brackets.) My reader, it was the glorious 
resurrection of the unconscious dead saints to life again, 
that animated and inspired Paul to " endure all things," 
and to " suffer the loss of all things," that '^ he might 
know Christ, and the power of his resurrection ; yea, he 
was willing to participate in his sufferings, and to bo 
assimilated to his death ; " If by any means he might 
attain unto the resurrection, that out from among the 
dead ones ;" (ten Exanastasin ton nekron. Phil. 3 : 11.) 
And Paul thus reasons, (1 Cor. 15 c.,) there are two 
natures, or two bodies, an '' animal body, and a spiritual 
body," for it is written. Gen. 2 : 7, the first Adam was 
only made into a living soul, and therefore was necessa- 
rily mortal and corruptible- as all other living souls are ; 
and if we are dependent upon him alone for life, we 
must necessarily perish. But the second Adam was 
made into a life-giving spirit *, that " he should give 
eternal hfe to as many as thou hast given him ;" hence, 
if we derive life from him, though we die in consequence 
of our connection with an earthly Adam, and the pos- 
session of a nature hke unto his ; yet we may bear tho 


image of the heavenly Adam, and be raised again from 
the unconsciousness and corruption inherited from the 
first Adam, to an incorruptible, or to a spiritual nature ; 
even to that " life and incorruption," which is promised 
in the gospel, a pattern of which was exhibited by the 
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. That we 
have not mistaken the animal nature of the " living 
soul," we will quote Gen. 9 : 14, as literally as we can : 
" And it shall come to pass, when I cloud a cloud over 
the earth, (that is, becloud the earth,) that the bow shall 
be seen in the cloud ;" 15 v. '^ And I will remember my 
covenant which is between me and between you, and 
between every living soul^ (or living animal, nephesh 
chayah^) of all flesh ; and the waters sliall no more be- 
come a flood to destroy all flesh." 16 v. " And the bow 
shall be in the cloud ; and I will look upon it, to remem- 
ber the covenant of ages between Elohim, and between 
every living soul of all flesh, that is upon the earth." 
These living souls of all flesh that were saved alive, are 
contradistinguished from the living souls of all flesh 
that were destroyed. Gen. 7:21, " And all flesh ex- 
pired that moved upon the earth, among fowl, and among 
cattle, and among beast, and among every creeping 
thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man ; all 
which had the breath of the spirit of lives in its nostrils, 
of all that w^as in the dry [landj died." 23 v. " And 
every living substance was destroyed." Thus we see 
that every creeping creature is a living soul, as we saw 
in Gen. 1 : 20, '^ And the Elohim said, the waters shall 
produce abundantly, the creeping living soul^ and fowl 
shall fly above the earth, in the face of the expanse of 
the heavens." 

In Gen. 1 : 20, 24, 30, and 2 : 19 ; four places in two 
chapters, all creatures are called living souls : in the ori- 
ginal it is " nephesh chayiah ;" and if in all these 
places we are compelled, by the context, to understand 
the phrase, " living soul," as being exactly equal to 
" living animal /" why should not the same identical 
phrase^ when applied only once to man, in one of the 
same chapters. Gen. 2 : 7, mean exactly the same thing ? 
And as God had endowed the other animals with the 
same breath of lives, which we find is no protection from 
death, we are compelled to understand Gen. 2 ; 7, " A^d 


Jehovah Elohim formed the Adam, dust of the (adamah) 
ground, and {nophakh^ blowed ; not nophash^ breathed;) 
blowed into his nostrils the breath of Uves, and the Adam 
became (or was,) a living animal:" and such is evidently 
the meaning of "living soul," in 1 Cor. 15 : 45, " The 
first man Adam was made a hving animal ;" having no 
principle of perpetual life in him : and he is contrasted 
in this very particular with the second Author of a race 
who should become immortal beings ; who, being the 
first-born from the dead, with an incorruptible nature, 
is " made a life-giving spirit." 

The animal nature derived from the first Adam, and 
the circumstance of our not having access to the " tree 
of lives," is the cause of death. For through the ofience 
of the first Adam, death reigns; for God drove the man 
out of the garden, " Lest he put forth his hand, and 
take also of the tree of lives, and eat, and live for ever.''^ 
And so we are taught to seek for what we do not now 
possess, Rom. 2 : 7, " To those who, by patient con- 
tinuance in well doing, seek for glory, and honor, and 
incorruption," God, in giving them the incorruptible 
nature, necessarily renders to them " eternal life." Thus 
we are forced to the same conclusion as was Paul : 1. 
That man is mortal ; 2. That immortality is conditional ; 
3. That no man will obtain it till the resurrection ; 4. 
That we can obtain it only through faith in Jesus Christ ; 
and, 5. That the wicked, possessing only an animal na- 
ture, and refusing to come to Christ that they may have 
life, will necessarily become extinct, under the infliction 
of the righteous judgment of God. 

At the commencement of this celebrated chapter, 
Paul says, Christ died, according to the Scriptures ; and 
that Christ was raised again from the dead. And he 
tells us, that it is the keeping in memory this gospel, 
" By which also ye are saved." Now we would affec- 
tionately ask, is a belief of the natural immortality of 
man, or of his soul, or of his spirit, or of the separate 
conscious existence of either soul or spirit, compatible 
with the belief of the gospel facts: 1. That Jesus Christ, 
the Son of God, truly died, gave up the whole of the 
life he possessed, that the Holy One was unconscious for 
a Hmited period in the heart of the earth ; and, 2. That 
God raised the unconscious being — whom he says he 


has begotten from the dead, and whom he calls his Son 
— from a state of unconsciousness and of death, to a 
state of life again ? Can an individual, schooled in the 
fables of the day, and still maintaining them, truly 
believe in the revivification of dead men ? Manifestly, 
he cannot 

We call the attention of our Universalist friends, to 
the important fact, that this chapter is addressed to 
Christian brethren^ and through it, he speaks only of the 
resurrection of Christians, and nothing about the resur- 
rection of the wicked, unless such allusion be found in 
the 22 ver., which is susceptible, in an isolated state, of 
two interpretations : 1. For as in Adam all men, whether 
righteous or wicked, die; even so in Christ shall the 
same all be made alive again by a resurrection ; or, 2. 
For as in Adam all die, even so shall all that are in 
Christ, (the «/^ of the 18 ver. that have fallen asleep in 
Christ, which, but for a resurrection, have perished,) be 
made alive by a resurrection. The first interpretation 
proves a general resurrection, without specifying what 
will be the fate of the wicked \ the second is more in 
accordance with the whole of the chapter. So there is 
no part of the chapter that helps forward the theory of 
the Universahst. Harwood thus translates it : " For as 
by Adam, all the human race were subjected to mor- 
tahty : so, by Christ Jesus, shall all the pious dead be 
entitled to immortality." And this translation connects 
admirably with the preceding and succeeding verses. 

Those who rightly appreciate the importance of the 
fundamental gospel doctrine, of " Life only through 
Christ Jesus," and understand the tenacity with which 
even pious persons, cling to the fables in which they 
have been educated, will readily excuse our lengthened 
exposition of the masterly argument of the apostle. 

ITim. 6: 11-16, Paul, after exhorting Timothy to 
^^ lay hold on eternal life," as of a something that might 
be lost, charges him before God, who giveth life to all, 
that he would keep that charge until the appearing of 
Jesus Christ, who, in his own times, would manifest the 
" blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and 
Lord of lords, who only hath immortality, dwelling in 
light unapproachable, whom no man hath seen nor can 
Bee." We understanding this as affirming that there is 


only one Being, whose face no man can see and live, 
the only God, who possesses immortality, or who cannot 
be subjected to death by virtue of his original nature. 
And that all other beings, including the Bon of God, 
angels, and men, who are now not subject to death, or 
are immortal, have undergone a change from their original 
natures, and have become incorruptible, and hence, im- 
mortal. God only is naturally immortal, — the only 
Being not subject to death, as the word athanasia [a^ 
without, thanasia^ death, deathless ; or, as a noun, 
deathlessness ;] implies. The Son of God was made 
subject to death, but now " death hath no more dominion 
over him ;" and he can say, '' I am he that liveth, and 
was dead ; and behold, I am alive for evermore. Amen." 
" And those who shall be accounted worthy to obtain 
that age, and the resurrection, out from among the dead 
ones, .... cannot die any more, .... being the sons of 
the resurrection." Eev. 1 : 18 ; Luke 20 : 35. This 
single passage ought to settle the question for ever, 
regarding the natural mortahty of man. If this passage 
be true, then man has no " deathless spirit," or " never- 
dying soul," to survive the death of the body. The 
attempt to avert the force of this passage, by asserting 
that God only has " independent" immortality, will not 
avail. The expression is absolute and unquahfied, and 
no creature has immortahty, independent, or derived, in 
virtue of his original nature. 

Immortahty is predicated upon incorruptibihty of 
nature ; this nature is ascribed to God, as pecuharly his 
own. 1 Tim. 1 : 17, "Unto the King of the ages, mcor- 
ruptihle^ invisible, the only God, be honor, and glory, 
for ages of ages, Amen." The word translated incorrup- 
tible, is, o/phthartos ; «, without, and phthartos^ corrup- 
tion ; not subject to decay. This word is interchanged 
with, and associated with immortahty, in 1 Cor. 1 5. This 
word is translated immortal, and immortahty, in Kom. 
2 : 7 ; 1 Tim. 1 : 17 ; 2 Tim. 1 : 10 ; and in some of the ver- 
sions, in Rom. I : 23, " Professing to be wise, they 
became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible 
(or immortal) God, into the likeness of an image of 
corruptible (or mortal) man, and (into the likeness of an 
image) of corruptible, or mortal, birds, and [&c.] of four- 
footed beasts, and of creeping things," Here man, 


associated with creeping things, is called corruptible and 
mortal, and is contrasted with God on this very point, 
who is incorruptible and immortal. 


If it could be proved that man has a separate soul, 
or spirit, that can live while the man is dead, which is 
an absurdity, it would not necessarily prove that that 
separate soul, or spirit, would never cease to live. Its 
living energies might wear out, or God might destroy 
it. But, on the contrary, if we have proved that man 
has no such separate conscious soul, or spirit, but that 
he, as a unit, descends into the grave, then we clearly 
establish the mortality of the whole man ; and, hkewise, 
the dependence of man upon the resurrection for all 
future life. We also establish the fact, which ought 
never to have been doubted, that the words immortahty, 
incorruptibility, hfe, death, destruction, corruption, and 
such like, are words to be always understood in their 
plain and obvious meaning. 

Now, may we be permitted to ask those who love the 
Lord Jesus Christ sincerely, and the truths he promul- 
gated : shall dogmas that make void the oiBfers of hfe 
through Jesus Christ, and undermine the very founda- 
tion of the gospel — as do those of the natural immortality 
of man, and the separate conscious existence of either 
soul or spirit — be attempted to be explained by a few 
flimsy inferences, rashly and unfairly drawn from a few 
texts, imperfectly understood, in which it obviously was 
not the design of the writers to discuss or teach any 
such subjects ? These dogmas, that practically deny 
that Christ is our life ; that explain away the gospel 
hope of the resurrection of the dead ; that put the honor 
on the first Adam, that belongs exclusively to the 
second ; — ought to have better grounds than rash infer- 
ences. Pagan fables, or the metaphysical deductions of 
a vain philosophy ! 

But we shrink not from investigation, and desire our 
opponents to bring forward their strongest reasons. 




"We shall notice the principal texts from which our 
opponents have drawn inferences ; some of which, being 
connected with the topics under discussion, have been 
already examined ; some others, connected with the 
punishment of the wicked, will be found under their 
appropriate headings. 

The theories we are opposing are very accommodating. 
Having invented the fables of the separate conscious ex- 
istence of the souls or spirits of dead men, these theorists 
require a place or places where they may be placed till 
'''-reunited'^ with their bodies; or, according to some, 
w^here they can exist forever without their grosser bodies, 
which — and they rejoice in the idea — are left in the grave. 
We will recite some of the places, where these souls or 
spirits are said to reside. 1. Where God and Christ are. 
2. Beyond the bounds of time and space. 3. Paradise in 
the skies. 4. The third heavens. 5. Three spheres into 
which the spirits are placed, according with the several 
states of progress. 6. The atmosphere. 7. Wandering 
about the earth as guardian spirits to friends on earth, 
or as evil demons haunting those who had injured them 
while they abode in fleshly tabernacles. 8. A place in 
the earth, divided into two apartments ; in one of which, 
— called Paradise — good souls are placed in conscious 
enjoyment. 9. In the other the wicked souls are placed, 
in conscious suffering. 10. Purgatory. 11. A horrid 
place called hell, burning with fire and brimstone, which 
is generally located near the centre of the earth, and 
esteemed to be far apart from the abode of the righteous. 


12. The poetical ^ spirit land ;' the precise locality of 
which the poets have not condescended to inform us. — 
And 13. In Abraham's bosom. Some consider the soul 
as an abstract essence, immaterial and invisible. Others 
that the soul is clothed with a sort of etherial vehicle or 
body, tangible and visible. Some, that the soul can 
assume at will a grosser or more etherial medium, accord- 
ing to circumstances. 

Is it wonderful, that in a book written in various lan- 
guages, a long time ago, in an Eastern country glowing 
with poetry, and full of highly wrought figures of speech, 
acting upon imaginations proud and tenacious of their 
fancied immortality, and having such various and indefi- 
nite notions of their own imaginings ; is it strange that 
an inference should occasionally be drawn that seemingly 
favored one of these views ? These persons, sitting by 
the bed-side of the dying Christian, and never leaving 
him, till they deposited him in the grave, will still affirm 
that his spirit went, as a conscious being, to God. Did 
they see it ? No. It is immaterial, and invisible. An- 
other will tell us that they distinctly saw the spirit of 
their departed friend, and can describe his dress and ap- 
pearance. Another will infer that the disembodied spirit 
of Moses was visible on the Mount of Transfiguration, 
and that the spirit of the thief was with Christ in Para- 
dise, the same day and at the same time that he was alive 
upon the cross, and that the spirit of Christ was in Para- 
dise, in heaven, where his Father is, and in hell, preach- 
ing, at the same time. 


Where are Samuel and the prophets ? In the heavens, 
most would answer ; and yet they would say, the witch 
raised up Samuel from the earth. See the account, 1 Sam. 
28 c. We suppose this woman, like the mediums of the 
present day, by the familiar spirit, or devil, was enabled 
to impose upon the king. God answered him not, 
" neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets ;" and 
we are very sure that God did not permit Samuel, who 
was one of the prophets, to answer him. Saul does not 
say. Bring me down the soul or spirit of Samuel from 
heaven • but " Bring me up Samuel." And the record, 


which we suppose was a record of the impression made 
upon Saul and his two servants, says, that " the woman 
saw Samueiy The whole account is not more mysteri- 
ous than the revelations of these latter days. Samuel 
came up from the ground, and proclaimed that ^Ho-mor- 
row shalt thou and thy sons be' with me." Mark the 
woman's prediction, that the ivicked Saul should be in 
the same place with the righteous Samuel ; and Samuel, 
not as a ghost, but in proper person, " ascended out of 
the earthy Eegarding this aft'air, merely as a clever im- 
position practiced by the woman, with perhaps the aid 
of her familiar spirit, or devil, we shall not give a length- 
ened exposition. But be warned ; 1 Chron, 10 : 13. — 
" So Saul died for his transgression which he committed 
against the Lord, even against the word of the Lord, 
which he kept not, and also for asking [-] of [-] a fami- 
liar spirit, to [dorash) earnestly search of it ; and earn- 
estly sought not of the Lord : therefore he slew him." 
Lev. 20 : G, " The soul that turneth after such as have 

familiar spirits I will set my face against Ma^ sow/, and 

will cut him off." See also Isa. 8 : 19, " Should a peo- 
ple seek to the dead, concerning the living ? Should 
they not seek unto their God ? Should they not seek 
unto the law and to the testimony : if the [spirits] speak 
not according to this word, it is because there is no 
light in them." 

Paul's desire to depart and be with christ. 

Did Paul desire to depart and be with Christy and to he 
absent from the body and present with the JLord^ in the 
sense of dying ? 

Phil. 1 : 21, " For me to live is Christ; but to die is 
gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my 
labor : which yet I shall choose I know not. For I am in 
a strait betw^een the two, having a desire to depart and 
to be with Christ which is far better." 

From these words some infer that Paul would depart 
at death, as a disembodied spirit, to Christ, and that 
Paul desired thus to depart. Samuel and Saul were to 
go down^ but Paul, they infer, must go up. Paul says 
no such thing. He says, 3 : 10 ; " That he was willing 

Paul's desire to depart. 137 

to be partaker of Christ's suiSerings ; if by any means he 
might attain unto the resurrection, that out from among 
the dead." 20 v. '^ For our citizenship is enrolled in 
heaven, from whence also we look for a vivitier, the Lord 
Jesus Christ, who will change our vile bodies (or natures) 
into the likeness of his glorious body," or nature, when 
he comes. So in this very epistle, as in all the others, 
he points to the coming of Christ, as the period when he 
expected to be with Christ. In the 10th v. of the same 
1 c, he points the Philhppians to " the day of Christ," 
as the period when he prayed that they might be found 
" without offence," and receive their reward ; and tells 
the Thessalonians, " That we which are alive and remain 
unto the coming of the Lord, shall not go before those 
that are asleep ;".... but " be caught up together with 
them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air," and 
thenceforward for " ever be with the Lord :" (1 Thess. 
4 : 15.) Could he in the 23 v. of 1 Phil, say that he ex- 
pected, or even desired to be with Christ prior to the 
period of his coming ? Will the reader refer to the 
period when the righteous are to receive their rewards on 
a subsequent page ? Prov. 30 : 4, " Who hath ascended 
up into heaven, or descended ?" John 3 : 13, "No man 
hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from 
heaven." Heb. 9 : 7, 11, 12, " Into the second [tabernacle] 
went the high priest alone once every year ; .... but 
Christ being come .... entered in once into the holy 
place." None but the high priest was to enter there 
upon peril of death. Heb. 8:5, " And these things 
serve unto the example and shadow of the heavenly 
things." How then could Paul expect to enter into the 
true tabernacle, into which none other than the great 
high priest is allowed to enter ? 

If we turn to 2 Cor. 5 : 5-10, we find that Paul uses 
the term body in the sense of person, as at present con- 
stituted, and as " flesh and blood cannot inherit the 
kingdom of heaven," Paul was desirous that his connec- 
tion with his corruptible nature might cease " that mor- 
tality might be swallowed up of life." God had given 
him " the earnest of the spirit," and he knew that " If 
the spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead 
dwelt in him, he that raised up Christ from the dead, 
would also re-enliven his mortal body on account of his 


spirit that dwelt in him :" Rom. 8:11, 19-25. "While 
we are at home in the body," whether that body be liv- 
ing or dead, we are associated with corruption, and as 
" corruption doth not inherit incorruption," we are neces- 
sarily " absent from the Lord," and from his incorruptible 
kingdom, whether we be living upon the earth, or sleep- 
ing in unconscious dust in the grave ; for our connection 
with dust and corruption does not cease until the "Author 
of Life," or " Life-giver," " DeUver us from the bondage 
of corrui)tion, into the glorious liberty of the children of 
God." For those " Are the children of God, being the 
children of the resurrection :" Luke 20 : 36. Therefore 
we, who " are at home in the body," which is corruptible, 
we " which have the first fruits of the spirit, even we our- 
selves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, 
to wit, the redemption of our body," from its state of 
corruption, by a change, if living, or by a resurrection 
from the dead, if dead, " when Christ, who is our Ufe, 
shall appear." " For the earnest expectation of the crea- 
ture waitethfor the manifestation of the sons of God^ — 
" For we are saved by hope." " We walk by faith, not 
by sight, we are confident, I say, and wilhng rather to be 
absent from the body" (of corruption) "and to be present" 
(in our glorified bodies) " with the Lord .... For we 
must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ ; that 
every one may receive retribution in the body^ according 
to what he hath done in it, whether of good, or whether 
of evil." 

Thus we see that the passage in 2 Cor. 5 : 6, and the 
passage in Phil. 1 : 23, mutually explain each other, sup- 
posing that Phil. 1 : 23 has been rightly translated ; for 
Paul might very consistently, epithumian^ " earnestly 
desire to depart," from his present state of existence, in 
connection w^ith corruption, and " to be with Christ," in 
his incorruptible and therefore immortal nature, " which 
is far better" than either living — in a state of suffering, 
peril, hardships, and cruel persecutions — or dyings and 
being exempted from all these ; ^^waiting^'^ in the silence 
of the grave till his " change should come," and he be 
awakened out of his sleep, " w^hen the Lord himself shall 
descend /ro??i heaven." He knew that whether he lived 
or died, Christ should be magnified in his body. For if 
he lived, he would promote the cause of Christ ; and if 


he died., his becoming a sacrifice on the altar of Truth, 
would still be gain to the cause of Christ, and cause the 
gospel to become matter of greater notoriety in all other 
places, V. 13 ; and as bis faith had divested death of all 
its terrors, and as life was accompanied with such toil 
and suffering, he did not know which to choose, whether 
to choose to live longer or to choose to die, and end his 
sufferings. Mark, reader ! He was perplexed between 
the TWO, whether to choose life, or to choose death, they 
were both equally indifferent to him ; but there was a 
third thing that Paul possessed (epithumian), an earnest 
desire for ; but that tJiird thing was obviously not either 
of the former two indifferent ones, and must therefore be 
something distinct from dying and going immediately to 
Christ ; for dying, or death, was one of the things that 
he did not deem so greatly preferable to life as to decide 
his choice. But again, this third thing was "far better." 
Better than what ? Better than Hfe, better than death, 
therefore death could not be the thing desired. We 
have shown that Paul might very consistently with his 
previous sentiments, expressed in Rom. 8, and 2 Cor. 4 : 
and 5 : earnestly desire to depart^ nay, he did thus earn- 
estly desire to depart from this body of corruption ; not 
that he might be found unclothed, but clothed upon ; 
that "this corruptible might put on incorruption ;" and 
he thus " be for ever with the Lord ;" not as a disem- 
bodied spirit, but in that " hfe and incorruption," a pat- 
tern of which " was manifested in the resurrection of 
Jesus Christ from the dead." In this sense we have no 
objection to the theology of the text as it now stands. — 
The text will no way sustain the altogether unwarranted 
inference, that Paul desired to die, that his disembodied 
spirit^ as a conscious ghost, might depart and be with 

As we know that many will still fondly cling to this 
text, we will analize it again. Do you ask, How then it 
would be gain to Paul to die ? Paul does not say it 
would be gain to him. Fill up the ellipsis according to 
grammatical laws. — " For me to hve, will be gain to the 
cause of Christ ; for Christ will, at all events, be magni- 
fied in my body, whether by my life, or by my death. — 
And for me to die is gain to the cause of Christ, for 
Christ will be magnified in ray body, whether / die or 
whether Hive?'* 


If you insist that it would be gain to Paul to die, we 
reply, he does not say so ; and if it would be gain to him 
personally, then he would not be in perplexity which to 
choose ; he would have chosen death, and thereby have 
magnified Christ and benefitted himself at the same time; 
and Christ would have employed other instrumentahties 
to proclaim the gospel, and Paul, on your supposition, 
would be no loser. We affirm, that the position of Paul 
was not so bad in his own estimation, as the position of 
afflicted Job was in his (Job's) estimation. He said, 
*' My soul chooses strangling rather than life," &c. ; but 
Paul does not know which to choose. We acknowledge 
that Paul might have been a gainer by death in some 
respects, for he would then rest from his labors, and his 
works would follow him ; and he would gain deliverance 
from all his trials and persecutions ; for irrespective of 
the hopes of a future life, based upon a resurrection from 
the dead, Paul says, " we (Christians) are of all men most 
miserable." I Cor. 15. So that if we suppose it might, 
in some sense, be gain to Paul to die, though his disem- 
bodied spirit did not go to Christ in living consciousness, 
you gain nothing by this supposition. 

Again, who does Paul mean by the pronouns ''we" and 
u p) 2 They evidently relate to the same person, or 
thing. If you say, they relate to his soul, or his spirit, 
then you make Paul say, it would be gain for his soul or 
spirit — which ever you prefer — to die !!! But if the ^me* 
and '/' refer to Paul's soul or spirit, then his body cer- 
tainly was not involved in the death !!! Now if the hne'' 
and '/,' so often expressed, refer only to a part of Paul, 
and that part the " never dying soul," or " the deathless 
spirit," one of which you will probably claim as the 
essential Paul ; when Paul talks of the death of the '/' 
and the ';?^e,' that is the death of his soul or of his spirit; 
will you be kind enough to inform us what becomes of 
his body ? If you shall venture to say, that dying and 
death, refer only to the body, and ' to depart^'' means to 
die, then you make Paul say that he earnestly desired 
that his body should die^ and that Ids body should depart 
and be with Christy which was far better than for his 
body to live ; for evidently the / that Paul desired might 
be with Christ, was the same 1 that was to live or die !!! 
Pray, then, what becomes of his soul or spirit ? Now 



suppose you throw away your untenable hypothesis of 
the double or triple entity of man ^ and beheve that Paul 
spoke of himself as an inseparable itnit^ and you will at 
once become disentangled from your otherwise inextrica- 
ble difficulties. We see that Paul could not desire to 
depart in the sense of dying, that an undefinable some- 
thing might go to Christ and live with him while Paul 
himself was dead. Thus it is evident — irrespective of 
our previous deductions — the notion that Paul desired to 
die, '' that his disembodied spirit," as a living, conscious 
entity, " might depart and be with Christ," is an inference 
entirely unwarranted ; and indeed, when examined, we 
find it without any rational proof 

By the adoption of this double nature, and double en- 
tity principle, we may hide the true sense of the plainest 
passages of Scripture. But if this principle of interpre- 
tation be apphcable to one case li must be applicable to 
all. Try the working of it. But first, we ask our read- 
ers to answer to themselves satisfactorily this question — 
Do the personal pronouns I, me, my, him, and such like, 
apply to the whole person or being, or only to a part of 
the man ? If you refuse to acknowledge that these pro- 
nouns apply to the man, in his whole nature, or person- 
ality — to the man as a unit, inseparable without loss, and 
dead without the spirit, which though the cause of fife, 
is not a living thing, — then we require you to affix first, 
the definite part, intended by them, and then strictly to 
adhere to their application to that part alone in all cases ^ 
and not ring the changes upon them, lest they should 
disturb some favorite theory. Gal. 4 : 20, *' ' I' desire to 
be present with you now." Did Paul desire as a disem- 
bodied spirit to be with the Galatians ? 1 Cor. 16 : 12, 
*' As touching our brother Apollos, * I' greatly desire 
him to come unto you." Not his spirit, but himself 
John 20 : 17, " Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not ; for 
' /' am not yet ascended to my Father." Some have 
aaid Christ only meant his body ; and why not apply the 
' V to the body of Paul ? Gen. 37 : 35, " For / will go 
down into the grave unto my son mourning." Acts 2 : 
34, " For David is not ascended into the heavens : but 
he saith himself''' &c. The personality of Christ, of Ja- 
cob, and of David, is here spoken of; yet some say, the 
pronouns, and even the name David, refer only to the 


body as being separate from the man. Now, my friends, 
apply your own principle of interpretation to Phil. 1 : 23, 
and when Paul says '' ' I' desire to depart and to be with 
Christ," he could only refer, you being consistent^ to his 
body. And Paul, to have been very exphcit, ought to 
have said, *' I desire my body to depart and to be with 
Christ, while my disembodied spirit shall still be confined 
in bonds in the prison at Kome" ! ! ! Now we intend to 
quote you two passages that do look more like this 
double entity notion, this separate existence of the spirit, 
than any other passages in the whole Bible ; and if you 
will agree that these separate the man into distinct parts, 
then you will have the shadow of an excuse for the appli- 
cation of this principle, of the separate conscious exis- 
tence of the spirit, to other places ; and we shall be dis 
posed to give you more credit for consistency, than we 
can do for intelligence. 

Col. 2:5," For though ' I' be absent in the fleshy yet 
* I' am with you in the spirit^ joying and beholding your 
order, and the steadfastness of your faith in Christ." 
Here you must perceive that Paul states, his spirit ivas 
rejoicing with the disciples at Colosse, while his Jiesh, 
which must include his body, was ajprwower at Rome, 
(See 4 c. 10 v.) That his spirit, acting as a living entity, 
was in a distinct place, and hundreds of miles distant 
from his flesh ! ! 1 Cor. 5:3," For ' /' verily, as absoit 
in body^ but present in spirit^ have judged already, as 
though I were present^ concerning him that hath so done 
this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when 
ye are gathered together, and my spirit^ with the power 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, to dehver such a one unto Sa- 
tan for the destruction of the fleshy that the spirit may 
be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." We suppose 
the latter part of the verse may mean, that the man was 
to be esteemed as belonging to the world, till he had ac- 
quired an ascendancy over his animal appetites ; that he 
himself, or, what is the same thing, his life might be 
saved when Christ comes. Such is the meaning Paul 
applies to flesh and spirit in Eom. 7 and 8 c. In this 
last quotation, we find the body of Paul at Philijypi^ and 
his spirit at Corinth^ at the same time. And though 
Paul explains himself, ' as though I were present,' yet 
he associates ^ my spirit'* with them, in passing judg- 


ment on the delinquent brother. We have one more 
quotation, which is apphcable to every case where you 
think you can find an illustration of the separate con- 
scious existence of the spirit : and we concede that James 
does speak of the spirit as a separate thing from the 
body ; but mark, not as a separate conscious thing. Jas. 
2 : 26, " The body without the sjiirit is deaciy And il 
the body without the spirit be dead, if the argument ol 
James is worth any thing, then is the spirit without the 
body destitute of hfe also. You need not look to your 
margins, for the word is {pneuma) spirit. Now apply 
this, whenever the body and the spirit are separated from 
each other, excepting in a figure, then both body and 
spirit are without life. We draw this conclusion, thai 
wherever body and spirit are spoken of as separately 
acting, it is a figure ; that when they are separated in 
reality, the man, in all his parts, is dead ; and whenever 
the personal pronouns are used, they invariably apply to 
all that constitutes the personality of the man. If it be 
necessary to quote in confirmation of such self evident 
deductions, we refer to 2 Cor. 10: 1, " Now ^ /,' Paul 
myse/j] beseech you." Eom. 7 : 25, " So then with the 
mind '/ inyselj\^ serve the law of God ; but with the 
flesh, the law of sin." I have but little doubt that spirit 
should occupy the place of mind ; though Grriesbach has 
thrown spirit into the margin, because, I suppose, he 
could not understand the verse ! Here we find Paul, the 
identical " / myself ^"^ using both his spirit and his Jiesh 
for different purposes. You may likewise consult Phil. 
2: 24 ; Gal. 5:2; Eph. 3:4; 1 Thess. 2 : 18 ; Phil. 
19. Thus we see, it was Paul himself that desired to be 
with Christ ; in his own proper personality. And so do 
/ desire to depart from this corruptible state, and to be 
with Christ in his kingdom. And I trust I can say with 
Paul, Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of 
righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall 
give me at that day : and not to me only, but unto all 
those also who love his appearing.^'' Just read 2 Cor. 
11 : 22-25, and Phil. 3:11, and substitute ' my spiriV 
for 7, and see how it appears. 

Some have supposed that Paul desired to depart in his 
proper person, the same as did Enoch in the antediluvian 
age, and as did Elijah in tiie age preceding the coming of 


Christ ; and Paul might have thought that another prac- 
tical example of the design of God to bestow perpetuity 
of life, would not be unsuitable in the gospel age. But 
God has given us a more suitable example of unending 
life, in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead ; 
that being the identical kind of unending Hfe promised in 
the gospel ; a life proceeding from an incorruptible na- 
ture. If Paul entertained such a desire it was perfectly 
natural and even innocent. For there are few persons, 
whose theology has not been vitiated, who do not con- 
sider death as a curse and a terror, and who would desire 
' to avoid it, and to be translated and changed " in tlie 
twinkling of an eye." But Paul did not expect this, till 
Christ left his Father's throne and assumed his owu 
throne, even the throne of his father David. For he 
knew that no man could enter " the holy place not made 
with hands," but the great High Priest, Christ Jesus. 
He knew,^ too, that before he could be with Christ he 
^' must be born again ;" and experience 2i physical change 
in the constitution of his nature — that he must first part 
with his present mode of existence, before he could pos- 
sibly assume another, or " be bom again" from the dead. 
Still we hope our opponents will perceive that there are 
various ways in which Paul could " desire to depart," 
without adopting their untenable and contradictory in- 
ference that Paul desired to depart as a disembodied 
spirit, while his body, to which the personality attaches, 
was corrupting in the grave ! ! 

After dwelling so long upon this celebrated text to de- 
monstrate that it does not mean what popular tradition 
supposes, perhaps you will ask. What does it mean ? 
Our reply is that our translators have corrupted the cor- 
ruption of the Latin Vulgate. The translation sanction- 
ed by Bishop Hughes, reads, " having a desire to be dis- 
solved and to be with Christ," which " dissolved'''' our 
translators have changed into " depart" ; and by thus 
doing, they have called forth this lengthy explanation. 
And as we write for the English reader, who cannot re- 
fer to the original, we have shown that the text corrupt- 
ed as it is, is yet susceptible of a consistent interpreta- 
tion ; and even as it stands, it gives not the least color 
to the monstrous inference, that some have endeavored 

Paul's destre to depart.- 145 

to deduce from it, that Paul could he dead and alive at 
the same time ! ! 

Phil. 1 : 23, appears as a conclusion from the whole of 
the paragraph going before from the 12 v. The words 
and even verses are transposed in some of the M88. 
8ome would read the verses in this order — 12, 13, 14, 
15, 17, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 21, 23, and 24. There will be 
a difference of opinion respecting the meaning of only 
three words of the original, gar, de, and una-lusia ; 
though some may differ in the construction of eis. We 
<5onsider this a fair translation of the 23 v, "I am per- 
plexed which of the two to choose, life or death ; but I 
have an earnest desire respecting the returning and being 
with Christ, which is greatly to be preferred," fto either 
life or death]. The next verse is equal to the idea : " But 
that this returning of Christ should be deferred, and your 
probation lengthened, is more needful for you." Ana- 
iusia, which we translate, the retur^tmg^ and refer it to 
Christ, is from aiia-luo: anay'^\gm^Q^ again, luo, to loose, 
to loose again. This word cannot receive any secondary 
meaning that is at variance with its radical import. Ana 
involves the idea of repetition, and we ask the candid 
reader, Had Paul ever been loosed before, m the sense 
of dying, so that he could be loosed again in the same 
manner as at first ? That is, die again a second death. 
If you say nay, then we say that Paul could not possibly 
refer this word to himself, but referred it to the person 
«poken of, in the very next word but one, as it occurs in 
the Greek text. He earnestly desired the analusia and 
with Christ to be ; that is, he wrote of the loosing again 
of Christ If Paul had not intended to -convey the idea 
of repetition, he w<^uld have used the word lusia, — the 
loosing, — without the ana. Luo occurs forty -three times 
in the N. T., and it is nof once translated depart, but 
thirty times to loose, and loose would not be improper in 
most of the others. A good example of luo contrasted 
with bound, occurs in 1 €or. 7 : 22 : ^^ Art thou bound 
to thy husbaad ? seek not to be loosed.'^'* The reader may 
■find the word several times repeated Mark 1 1 : 2-5. 

Homer applies the word ana-luo to the loosing again 
•of the cables of a ship, in order to sail from a port. See 
Odyss. IX., line 178 ; XL line 636 ; XII. line 145; XV. 
line 547. So Sophoc. Elect 142, applies ana-luo, to the 


setting out on a voyage, viz., by loosing again the cablei^ 
or weighing anchor ; also, a journey. Westein shows 
that it is used in the Greek writers lor returning, or de- 
partingfrom a supper, and from a banquet, hence the 
word is used- in a secondary sense for a departing again^ 
returning, coming back, untieing, unravelling. The 
noun analusis^ from the verb ana-luo^ from which 
we get our English word analysis^ besides embracing 
the meaning of the verb, a separation again of something 
bound or compounded*, division again, dissolution. But 
never departure in the sense of dying; but departure 
in the sense of departing from a place oji a journey. In 
2 Tim. 4:6, " The time of my analusis is at hand." This 
loosing again evidently implies dissolution^ and so it m 
properly rendered in the Yulgate, but is corrupted into 
departure in our translation. We regret exceedingly^ 
that the word analusia, in its compound verbal form, oc- 
curs but in one other place in the N. T. But that one 
case, fortunately for the cause of truth, is exactly to the 
point, and refers to the identical circumstance that Paul 
refers to in Phil. 1 : 23, viz r The setting out of Christ 
from heaven to take possession of his kingdom. In Luke 
19 : 12, Christ said, " A certain nobleman went into a 
far country to receive for himself the sovereignty, [Syriac 
to obtain royalty] and to return.^' The sovereign of Ju?- 
dea had to go to Eome to " receive'^ i\\Q sovereignty ^ be- 
fore he returned to exercise it at home, not a distant king- 
dom as the common version makes it appear. And Christ 
is now sitting upon his Father's throne till he be invested 
with the sovereignty of his own kingdom, the kingdom 
of his father David- To his return from heaven there i» 
frequent allusion in Scripture. Luke 12 : 35, ^^ Let your 
loins be girded about, and your lights be burning; and 
ye yourselves like unto men that maitfor their lord — -pote 
ana-lusei ek ton gamon^ — translated "^ "When he shall re* 
turn from %\\q wedding." Here, in allusion to- the very 
same fact th^t Paul earnestly desired, the word ana-lusei 
occurs ; and it is translated '^ return." So ana-lusai 
in our text, means the loosing again-, or the " returning^'* 
of Christ from heaven again. 

We trust that every cawdid reader will acknowledge 
that Paul must refer the ana-lusiw — the loosing again — 
to Christ, to whom the word is applicable, and a thing 

Paul's desire to depart. 147 

to be earnestly desired, and not to himself, to whom the 
word cannot be applicable, as it would be making Paul 
say,^^ That it was very difficult for him to decide which 
of two things, hfe or death, he should most desire, and 
in the same breath declaring that he earnestly desired 
one of the two, namely, death, which was far better than 
the other one, which at the same time could not be made 
the object of his choice, because the comparative advan- 
tages of each, of life and death, were so nearly balanced ! ! I 




We shall very much augment the strength of our ar- 
gument respecting the " intermediate state," and immor- 
tality, by pointing out the locality of the residence of the 
immortalized saints, as well as by showing that the pre- 
sent residence of the dead saints is in sheol^ usually trans- 
lated hell^ though sometimes the grave and the pit. 

Dan. 2d c, Nebuchadnezzar saw a great image repre- 
senting successive kingdoms located on this earth, end- 
ing with a divided state of the kingdoms, into ten parts 
or kingdoms. 44 v., " And in the days of these kings 
shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall 
never be destroyed." As the other kingdoms were located 
upon this earth, so will this be. When Christ hath sub- 
dued the nations, then will the great voices be heard, 
saying, ''The kingdoms of ^^^5 -w^or/Shave become the king- 
doms of our Lord, and of his Christ ; and he shall reign 
for ever and ever." Eev. 11 : 15. 


Gal. 4 : 26. — '' But Jerusalem which is above, is free, 
which is the mother of us all." Phil. 3 : 20. — " For our 
citizenship is enrolled in heaven, from whence also we 
look for the Savior," &c. Heb. 12 : 22, 23.—" But ye 
are coming to Mount Zion, and unto the city of the liv- 
ing God, the heavenly Jerusalem — to the general assem- 
bly of the first-born, which are written in heaven^ 11 : 
16, " But now they desire abetter country, that is a hea- 
venly : wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their 


God : for he hath prepared for them a city." Eev. 21 : 
1, 2, And I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, 
coming down from God out of heaven." 

The Jerusalem here alluded to does not exist in hea- 
ven, but is above old Jerusalem in rank and privileges, 
as the margin of the previous verse testifies. Indeed, she 
now only exists in the vision of the prophets, and in the 
faith of beUevers ; but she will be created on, and 
help to glorify the new earth. Isa. 65 : 17-19, " For be- 
hold I create new heavens and a new earth : and the 
former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind ;" 
[on account of the excellency of the latter]. " But be 
ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create ; for 
behold I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a 
joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my 
people." When that period arrives, God will create Je- 
rusalem, as well as the new earth, as Isa. 33: 17-24; 
65 : 17-22 ; Eev. 21 : 4; all declare. There is a necessity 
for a new heavens and new earth, because, (I,) the pre- 
sent heaven (the atmosphere), and perhaps the present 
earth — '' between the river of Egypt and the great river 
Euphrates," excepted — are to be burned. See Deut. 
32:22; Isa. 24 : 19, 20 ; 34:4; 51:6; Mic. 1:4;2 
Pet. 3 : 10-12; Eev. 20 : 11 ; 21 : 1-5. Because, (2,) 
God has promised to create a new atmosphere, and a 
new earth, as the same Scriptures or contexts all declare. 
And because, (3,) God has promised to restore all the 
waste places which are now in ruins : See Jer. 48 : 47 ; 
49 : 6-39 ; Ezk. 16 : 55 ; compare v. 46 with 61 ; Isa. 14 : 
7 ; Acts 3:21; 1 Tim. 6:13. Because, (4,) the promise 
made to Abraham and his righteous seed, includes the 
new heavens and new earth. See Gen. 13 : 14, 15 ; 17 : 
8 ; 22 : 17 ; compare Eom. 4:13; Acts 7:5; Heb. 1 1 : 
8-14, with Gen. 12:4; 13 : 6 ; 25 : 7 ; Isa. 33 : 17 ; Exo. 
6 : 4. Because, (5,) All the righteous of every clime are 
heirs of the same new earth with their father Abraham. 
See Gal. 3 : 29 ; Ps. 37 : 3-34 ; Prov. 2 : 21, 22 ; Is. bl : 
13 ; 60 : 21 ; Dan. 7 : 18-27 ; Mat. ^\b\ Acts 26 : 6-8 ; 
Eev. 5 : 10. The wicked possess the present earth, and 
rule in every nation. Job 9 : 24, The earth is given into 
the hands of the wicked. Compare with Prov. 10 : 30, 
The wicked shall not inhabit the earth: which texts can 
only be reconciled by the creation of a new earth. Cora- 


pare alsoPs. 73:3-12 ; Mat. 6: 19 ; John 15: 19; 1 John 2: 

1 5. Because, (6,) Christ has the promise of the new earth. 
See Ps. 2 : 7-9 ; 72 : 8, 10 ; Dan. 7: 14-27 ; and Christ dis. 
owns this earth for his kingdom. John 18: 36; Mat. 
8 : 20 ; 2 Tim. 4 : 1. Because, (7,) the present Mount 
Zion will be the capital, the seat of government in the 
new world. See Psa. 132 : 13, 14 ; Isa. 24 : 23 ; 35 : 10 ; 
59 : 20 ; Ezk. 37 : 12 ; Mic. 4:7; Ps. 72 : 6, 8 ; Kev. 21 : 
1, 3, 9, 10. And, because, (8,) Christ is to sit upon the 
throne of his father David, in Mount Zion, and to 
reign there as King for ever. See Luke 1 : 31, 33 ; 24 : 
39; Eph.5:30; Acts 1:11; Ps. 132:11; 89:35-37; 
Isa. 9 : 6, 7 ; Ezk. 21 : 25-27 : Ps. 50 : 2. 

JNow as the city. New Jerusalem, will be placed upon 
Mount Zion, the very place on the new earth where old 
Jerusalem stood, and there also will Christ reign on Da- 
vid's throne, this city, New Jerusalem, does not at pre- 
sent exist. Before John saw her " coming down from 
God out of heaven," he saw the new earth created and 
ready to receive her. Kev. 21 : 1,2. And before she was 
seen in reality in the heavens, or in the atmosphere, Paul 
saw her created. That is, he saw the citizens of the New 
Jerusalem raised from the dead, and " caught up in the 
clouds to meet the Lord in the air." See 1 Thess. 4 : 
16, 17. Then we infer that the New Jerusalem is the 
church of the first born from the deadj and is composed 
of all " the spirits," that is all the persons, " of the just 
men made perfect" in their incorruptible or resurrection 
state ; of those mortal persons who, when they rise from 
the dead, " will put on incorruption" and " immortahty.'' 
They cannot be made perfect, in the New Jerusalem 
sense, till " that which is perfect is come," and our cor- 
ruptible natures " clothed upon" with our incorruptible 
matures, and till " mortality shall be swallowed up of 
life" everlasting. 2 Cor. 5 : 4. We conceive, therefore, 
that Paul's New Jerusalem was the church in her resur- 
rection state which will be planted on Mount Zion, the 
city of the hving God. 

Strongly confirmatory of this are the passages found 
in John 3 c. ; 1 Thess. 4 c. ; Heb. 12c.; Jude, and 
Zech., by which the progress of the first-bom church can 
be traced. 1. They are redeemed, bought back from 
corruption and the grave by the blood of Christ. For 


observe, Paul is speaking of the church in ber perfected 
or resurrection state on the new earth, when all her mem- 
bers will be made perfect. This perfect state of the 
<;hurch was often seen in vision as though it already ex- 
isted, nevertheless it is yet in the future. Observe, Paul 
does NOT say that the innumerable company is in heaven, 
but only that they are written, or enrolled in heaven : 
Heb. 12: 23. The Phillipians living upon tJie earth — 
whom Pa^l contrasts with the apostates, the enemies of 
the cross of Christ, wbo were minding earthly things, ^nd 
who likewise were living mith them upon the earth — con- 
.stituted a part oi this innumerable company, and himself 
likewise as one of them, Phil. 3 : 20, " For our citizen- 
ship (of the New Jerusalem) is enrolled in heaven ; from 
-whence ^Iso we lool<: lor the Savior, the Lord Jesus 
Christ ; who shall change our vile bodies, that they may 
be fashioned like unto his most glorious body, according 
to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all 
things unto himself" And although their names were 
enrolled as citizens of the New Jerusalem, in the Lamb's 
book of life, they might be " blotted out" therefrom ; and 
exhorting them, he says, "Therefore, my brethren, dear 
ly beloved and longed for, my joy and crown, so stand 
fast in the Lord my dearly beloved." And as the spirits, 
.or minds, of these persons were purified by the belief of 
the truth, Paul calls these persons, then dwelling upon 
the earth, associated with all the other citizens of the 
^ame country, " who looked for a city which hath founda- 
tions, whose Builder and Maker is God.* "whether living 
then, or in their graves, or y^t to live upon the earth ; be- 
tcause -their spirits or minds were to be sanctified by the 
truth^ he calls these persons " spirits ;" and likewise be- 
eause they will have a spiritual natura Titus 3:5- 

It is a common practice of a;ll .the propbets to speak of 
future events as though present^ and sometimes even as 
though they were past. See Isa. 53 : 5, and Rev. 13 : 
18. Because all things past, present, and to come, are 
naked and open unto the eyes of him with whom we 
have to do, he often calleth those things that be not as 
though they were. Heb. 4 : 13, and Eom. 4 : 17, 

The kingdom of heaven properly means the reign of 
beaven, and is so translated in many versions. The reign 
o£ keaven will truly commence when all earthly thrones 


are cast down. This kingdom is not ahove^ nor in hea- 
ven ; but launder the whole heaven : See Dan. 7 : 14, 18, 
27. " Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this 
little child, the same is greatest in the reign of heaven."" 
" Suffer the little children to come unto me,....for of sucb 
is the reign of heaven :" Mat, 18 : 4 f 19 : 14. " He that 
is least in the reign of heaven" (when all are made per- 
fect in the new earth) " is greater than John/' (the bap- 
tist in his imperfect state). Mat, 11 : IL But this i» 
speaking of the resurrection state as though it were pre- 
sent. It is in this sense that God calls himself a God not 
of the dead, but of the hving, for all his saints live unto 
him ; Luke 20 : 27-40. The dead saints^ although their 
"thoughts have perishedy"^ and they "know not any- 
thing;" though they are dead to themselves and to all 
others ; yet they are alive in the purpose and in the 
vision of God. The object of Jesus in his address to the* 
Sadducees was to prove that there would be a resurrec- 
tion of the dead. Mark, God is not the God of the- 
wicked dead ; but of living saints,, and Christ argue» 
that this saying of God to Moses, proves that there will 
be -a resurrection of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob^ 
and consequently of all the righteous. But if Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, had been actually Hving at that time,, 
then God would have been the God of the Hving without 
a resurrection^ and the argument of our Savior was a 
failure. But as he triumphantly silenced the Sadducees,. 
and convinced them that their favored prophet really 
taught a resurrection in these words ; then Abraham^ 
Isaac, and Jacob, are dead and unconscious, and are de- 
pendent upon the resurrection for all future life, and 
must be raised again from the dead before they can live- 
Thus taught Christ — and thus taught all the Apostles. 
The future Hfe is dependent upon a resurrection from 
the dead. But although these live to God, or in his pur- 
pose, yet is it true as Paul says, if the dead rise not, 
then Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and aU the saints be- 
fore Christ's time,, have already perished. They ' must 
be born again' from the dead ' before they can enter the 
kingdom of heaven ;' and they cannot be born again, till 
they have parted with their original conscious existence. 
This future life, the portion of Abraham, Isaac, and Ja- 
cob, is " hid with Christ in God> and when Christ who 


is their life, shall appear" " again, a second time, without 
a sin offering unto salvation," " then shall" Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, " appear in glory with him." See 
Heb. 13:20; 1 Thess. 4: 14; Col. 3:3. If the Sad- 
ducees had believed that Christ taught that the dead 
patriarchs were actually alive in another world, they 
would have only altered their question, from, " There- 
fore, in the resurrection^ whose wife of them is she ? for 
seven had her to wife ;" unto, " Whose wife is she now 
in the other world ?" But listen to the answer of Jesus. 
" The children of this age marry, and are given in mar- 
riage : but those that shall be esteemed worthy to obtain 
that age and the resurrection (tees ek nekron) that out 
from among the dead ones, neither marry nor are given 
in marriage : neither can they die any more : for they are 
equal unto the angels ; and are the children of God, be- 
ing the children of the resurrection :" [And Moses in 
effect shewed you this doctrine at the bush.] 

If there be a hngering doubt as to the unconsciousness 
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, read Gen. 25 : 8 ; 35 : 29, 
and 43, where a full account is presented of the death 
and burial of these holy men, and not the least hint that 
any part of them ever went to heaven. (See our remarks 
on these passages, in another chapter.) Read 1 Kings 
2 : 10, " David slept with his fathers, and was buried in 
the city of David." As this was a man of God, we ask, 
Did he sleep with his living fathers in heaven ? What 
means Peter, Acts 2 : 34, " For David is not ascended 
into the heavens." Here we must contend that the liv- 
ing, the thinking, the immortal part, if David had such a 
part, would be called David ; and not what some affect 
to contend as merely the outside shell : and it is that 
David, the essential part, call it by what name you 
please, that is now sleeping with his fathers. Eead Zech. 
1:5," Your fathers, where are they ? and the pro- 
phets, do they live for ever ?" Would God ask such 
questions as these, if he knew that they were all 
alive in heaven ? The Jews said to Christ, John 8 : 
52, " Abraham is dead, and the prophets (are dead).'' 
They then did not believe they were alive in heaven. 
But if such were not the fact, we should have expected 
Christ to have countenanced the popular dogma, and 
have rephed, " Truly the bodies of Abraham and the 


prophets are dead ; but their souls are alive and rejoicing 
in heaven" !!! But this separate conscious existence of 
the soul is of human, and not of divine origin. 


2 Cor. 12 : 2, " I knew a man in Christ above fourteen 
years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell ; or 
whether out of the body, I cannot tell : God knoweth,) 
such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew 
such a man (whether in the body, or out of the body, I 
cannot tell : God knoweth,) how that he was caught up 
into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is 
not lawful for a man to utter." 

Will an objector say, that the above passage implies 
that Paul was caught up to the third heaven or paradise, 
either as a separate conscious spirit, or bodily, in his 
whole person ? and that the first supposition proves the 
possibility of the separate conscious existence of the 
spirit ; and that both suppositions imply the existence of 
the third heaven or paradise at that time ? We reply, 
first — The original text does not say that Paul was 
caught up ; the little word up^ is a gloss of the transla- 
tors, and expresses merely their opinion. As the word 
eis implies motion towards a place, if it were first proved 
that paradise was upwards, then the word would have 
been admissible. *' That he was snatched away to para- 
dise," seems to be the sense. Secondly — Paul's expres- 
sion, " Whether in the body or out of the body," seems to 
imply that Paul did not know whether his nature, con- 
stitution, or person — which we have shown Paul often 
calls his body — whether this nature, or body, was changed 
from a corruptible to an incorruptible state, to enable 
him fully to appreciate the enjoyments of paradise, fox 
flesh and blood, and pain were unfit for, and could hard- 
ly realize the scenery and enjoyments of paradise. 
Fourthly — we reply, that the whole afifair was evidently 
a vision, and such Paul declares it to be in verse 1, " I 
will come to visions and revelations of the Lord." In 
the same sense, John saw the same things, the new hea- 
vens and the new earth, as well as a progressive course 
of events running through thousands of years, prior to 
%]\Q preation of the new heavens and the new earth, and 


the restoration of paradise — that is, a garden of delights 
— therein. The prophets saw many things in vision, 
which did not actually exist till thousands of years after. 
Peter plainly explains the nature of this third heaven, 
and also when it will exist. He assures us {2 Pet. S: 5) 
that the Jirst heavens (or atmospheres) and earth, being 
overflowed with water, perished ; The second heavens (or 
atmospheres) and earth, which are now, (and of course 
distinguished from the Jirst and third in point of time,) 
are kept in store reserved unto fire against a day of judg 
ment and perdition of ungodly men. Of this second 
heavens and earth he says : " In the day of the Lord, the 
heavens (or atmospheres) shall pass away with a great 
noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the 
-earth also, and the works that are therein, will be dis- 
covered, (kad ge, kai ta en autl ergo., eurethesetai, Vati- 
can MB,,) rtxA katakalsjtai, ' be burned up.' The third 
heavens, Peter points out in the 13 v, " Nevertheless we, 
according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new 
earth, wherein dwelleth justification." 

This same third heavens was seen in vision by John. 
Rev. 21 : 1, " And I saw a new heaven and a new earth : 
for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away ; 
and there w^as no more sea. And I John saw the holy 
city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of hea- 
ven." Rev. 2 : 7, "To him that overcometh will I give 
to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the 
paradise of God," This third heaven is adverted to by 
Paul, Heb. 2:5, It was foreseen and hailed by the 
patriarch Abraham as his " paternal country." Heb. 
11 : 14, 16 ; and in it will be the ^ city of the living God.' 
Heb. 12 • 22. The everlasting habitation of those who 
shall attain unto the first resurrection. Rev, 21 : 7, "To 
him that overcometh I will give these things." DosO 
auto tauta^ Vatican and Moscow. The careful reader 
wall perceive that the tree of hfe is to be in the new earth, 
and paradise likewise will be in the new earth, and the 
third heavens is likewise to be associated with paradise 
in the new earth, all in the future, and will not be actual- 
ly in existence till the Lord shall " send Jesus Christ, 
who was before appointed for you ; whom the heavens 
must retain until the times of the restoring of all things 
that God has spoken of by the mouth of his holy pro- 


phets since the world began," It follows, therefore, 
from the foregoing, that Paul could only be snatched to 
paradise in vision^ and the trance or extasy was so 
powerful, and appeared so real that, at the time, he could 
not tell whether he was changed from his body of cor- 
ruption to incorruption ; and in this state he saw the 
glories of the coming paradise, and afterwards changed 
back again as before, or whether he had seen these things 
without experiencing such a change. Paul had no idea 
that his ghost was caught away from his body, for he 
knew that ^' the body without the spirit is dead." Sure- 
ly if Paul had been dead and restored to life again, he 
would have known it. It was no unusual thing for Paul 
and others to use the words body and flesh to denote a 
state of corruption and mortality. See Phil. 3:21; 1 
Cor. 15 : 50 ; Gal. 2 : 20 ; Heb. 2 : 14 ; Eom. 7 : 24; Ps. 
56: 4 ; 78 : 39 ; Isa. 40 : 6 ; Jer. 17 : 5 ; Dan. 2 : 11 ; 2 
Cor. 12 : 2 ; Phil. 1 : 22, 24 ; Heb. 13 : 3, compared with 
Exo. 21 : 3. " If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years 
shall he serve : and in the seventh he shall go out free 
for nothing. If he came in with his body [only,] he shall 
go out with his body [only :] if he were married, then 
his wife shall go out with him." (Margin.) Body is 
here rendered himself: Body and self then are synono- 
mous expressions. When in 2 Cor. 5 : 8, Paul says, 
" While we are at home in the body we are absent from 
the Lord :" the we does not mean an immortal ghost, but 
the veritable Paul himself^ and all Christians themselves, 
who, while connected with this corruptible body or na- 
ture, are necessarily absent from the Lord. Now if the 
WE refer to the immortal ghosts of Christians, because 
WE are at home in the body, and we are absent from the 
Lord, then the we in 2 Kings 7 : 3, should mean immor- 
tal ghosts likewise. " The four leprous men said one to 
another, Why sit we (immortal ghosts) here until we 
die ? If we say, we will enter into the city, then the fa- 
mine is in the city and we shall die there, and if we sit 
still here we die also." We insist that the same princi- 
ple of interpretation be carried out, and then the we, the 
immortal souls of these men will die at all events, and 
thereby prove that they are but mortal souls after all ! 
We ask again. Could the jailor have killed himself, if 
himself was an immortal ghost that could not be killed ? 


yet himself dwelt in a body, or rather, was a body. We 
have said sufficient to convince candid persons that we 
must all remain at home in the body of corruption oi 
mortahty, whether that body be dead or alive, until we 
put on incorruption and immortality, at the resurrection, 
when *' mortality is swallowed up of life," and we "caught 
up to meet the Lord in the air," thenceforward to " be 
ever with the Lord." 

We might also show that body and flesh are twenty- 
six times used to represent a sinful state, so that persons 
are said to be children of the flesh or in an unconverted 
state, in opposition to being children of God. See Rom. 
6: 6; 9: 8; I Cor. 5: 5; Gal. 5: 19, 24; Eph. 2: 11 ; 
Col. 2 : 11, 18 ; 1 Pet. 4:2; Rom. 8:8; Ezk. 16: 26 ; 
John 1 : 13 ; Rom. 7:5; 8 : 9, 10; 1 Cor. 10 : 18 ; 2 
Cor. 10:2; Gal. 4 : 23, 29 ; Col. 2:13; 1 Pet. 2 : 11 ; 
2 Pet. 2: 10, 18; and Jude 23. 

Body and flesh are thirty-six times used to distinguish 
the workings of the animal nature or lower order of fa- 
culties, from the workings of the higher intellectual and 
moral faculties, and the working of the Spirit of God. 
See Rom. 4:1; 8 : 4-23 ; 9 : 3, 5 ; 13:14; 1 Cor. 1 : 
26 ; 10 : 18 ; 2 Cor. 1 : 12, 19 ; 10 : 2, 3 ; 11:18; Gal. 
1:16; 3:3; 4:23,29; 5:13,16,17,19,24; 6:8; 
Eph. 6:5; 2 Pet. 2: 10. 

The flesh is used sixteen times for mind. See Pro v. 
5: 11, 17; Ecc. 2: 3; 11:10; 12 : 12; Jer. 12: 12; 
Ezk. 21:5; 23 : 20 ; 1 Cor. 5:5; 7 : 4, 28 ; 2 Cor. 7 : 
5 ; Col. 2 : 23. 

Body is fifteen times used for church. See Rom. 12 : 
5 ; 1 Cor. 10 : 17 ; 12 : 13, 27 ; Eph. 1 : 23 ; 2 . 16 ; 3 : 
6; 4: 4, 12, 16; 5 : 23 ; Col. 1 : 18, 24; 2 : 17 ; 3: 15. 

Having seen the various ways in which body and flesh 
are used we should be careful how we draw an inference 
from an isolated case of the use of the term body, and 
that inference should always be repudiated when it con- 
tradicts the testimony of the word of the Lord, clearly 
and plainly expressed. If the terms body and Jiesh are 
used two hundred and six times to signify the creature, 
or person himself ; and fifty times to distinguish between 
the desires of the flesh or animal nature, and those of the 
mind or intellectual nature ; thirty-six times to distin- 
guish the will of man from the will of God ; sixteen times 


to signify the mind of the person ; and twenty-six times 
to represent an unconverted state ; and the body fifteen 
times used to represent the church : is it marvelous that 
body and flesh should twenty times be used to signify our 
nature as at present constituted ; or a state of mortahty 
and corruption ? And that in one of these last cases, 2 
Cor. 12 c, the word body can be so perverted as to seem 
to conform to the notion of the separate conscious exis 
tence of the spirit ? Is it not rather more marvelous, 
that out of the three hundred and fifty-four cases of the 
anomalous application of the terms body and flesh, there 
should be only one case that can by any possibility be 
made consistent with the separate conscious existence of 
the spirit ? and that one case only when taken aivay 
from its connection ? as the context assures us that we 
cannot be " absent from the body and present with the 
Lord, till mortality is swallowed up of life ;" or until 
we are entirely deprived of all connection with our pre- 
sent mortal nature by putting on incorruption and im- 
mortality at the resurrection, or by a change equivalent 
thereunto at that time. And it is the more astonishing 
that such an inference should be drawn, because Paul 
used the same form of expression twice, namely, in 1 
Cor. 5 : 3, and Col. 2 : 5, where he only meant to express 
the idea, that his mind was with them in sympathy, while 
his body, or flesh, or person, was in a diflerent place ! 
Remember, Paul was at Philippi when he wrote, " For 
/ verily, as absent in body^ but present in spirit^ have 
judged already, as though I were present, concerning 
him that hath so done this deed." And that Paul was 
at Rome, when he wrote to the Colossians, " For though 
/ be absent in the fleshy yet am I with you in the spirit^ 
joying and beholding your order, and the steadfastness 
of your faith in Christ." We have just as good a foun- 
dation for the inference, that in these two cases, the Hv- 
ing spirit of Paul, as a conscious ghost, was separated 
from his body, leaving it dead — or alive if you please — 
in the one case, the ghost at Corinth, the body at Phihp- 
pi ; and in the other, that the spirit was at Colosse re- 
joicing there, while his body was at Rome, as that the 
spirit of Paul as a living conscious being, and the body 
of Paul, either living or dead, could be in two distinct and 
distant places at the same instant of time !! And wo 


have the advantage of the traditionists ; we give him two 
examples iox one I And we have this additional advan- 
tage, that our two examples most clearly imply, when 
taken apart from their context, and from all correct no- 
tions of philosophy, and from the unity of the nature of 
man elsewhere most clearly revealed, that Paul was in 
two distinct and distant places, after a certain manner, at 
the same moment of time. While the solitary example 
of the traditionist, refers to periods two thousand years 
apart !! But let all our bare inferences sink into merited 
oblivion, and let us both agree, that the three examples 
are mere idiomatic forms of expression used by Paul, 
that were all equally well understood by the Corinthians 
and Oolossians to whom he wrote ; and that they never 
supposed Paul was actually present with them, while his 
body was absent, otherwise than in mind and sympathy ;* 
or that Paul could actually go to Christ, or receive his 
reward, otherwise than in a body, for he wrote, as trans- 
lated from the Syriac in the 10 v, '^ For we are all to 
stand before the judgment seat of the Messiah, that each 
may receive retribution in the body^ [for] what he hath 
done in it, whether of good, or whether of evil." These 
inferences would liever have been drawn if we had not 
first been indoctrinated into the dogma of the separate 
conscious existence of the spirit. 


Luke 23 : 42, " The thief said unto Jesus, Lord, re- 
member me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And 
Jesus said unto him. Verily I say unto thee, to-day shalt 
thou be with me in Paradise." 

From this text an objector infers that the Spirit of 
Christ, and the spirit of the thief, were certainly together 
as living beings, in that very day, in a place called Para- 
dise ; which place some supposed to be in the heavens. 
In reply to the objector we observe, that this is the first 
time that Paradise is named in the Bible, and it occurs 
but twice more, in 2 Cor. 12:4, and Eev. 2 : 7, and in 
these two places, we have proved, that Paradise refers 
to a location on the new earth. Please observe that 
the kingdom of Christ, in which the thief desired to bo 
remembered, is not above the heavens, nor in heaven, 


but is " under the whole heaven." See Dan. 7 : 14, i8, 
27. Paradise is a word of Persian origin, and means a 
garden of delights. It is used in the Septuagint to 
translate the garden of Eden. We desire to ask a few 
questions : 1. Did not the thief understand the Bible 
doctrine of Paradise, and of the coming and kingdom of 
Christ, better than the * learned' divines of the popular^ 
theory ? For had he understood, or believed that the 
kingdom of Christ was not under the whole heaven, but 
was at that time actually in heaven, and there ready to 
receive all penitent immortal souls at death : Would not 
his prayer have been,: Lord, remember my soul when it 
leaves the body and receive it into heaven ? But he of- 
fered no such prayer because he did not believe the doc- 
trine. Instead of which he prayed, " Lord, remember 
me when thou comest into thy kingdom." Or as some 
manuscripts read, " Lord, remember me in the day of 
thy coming." Both of which questions perfectly harmo- 
nize with the Bible doctrines, that he must die, and 
" know not anything," and that those who sleep in Jesus 
would be raised from the dead at his coming and the es- 
tablishment of his kingdom on the eajth. 2. Supposing 
this genuine history, and the thief a true penitent : Would 
the compasionate Savior mock him, at this solemn period, 
either by making to him an ambiguous promise, or by 
promising what he knew would not, and could not be 
fulfilled V 3. How could either Christ or the thief be in 
Paradise that day, when Paradise does not yet actually 
exist ? 4. How could Christ be in Paradise that very 
day he was crucified, when on the third day after he said 
to Mary, " Touch me not ; for I have not yet ascended to 
my Father" ? John 20 : 17. If you say, the ^ mel here 
refers to his body, and his body had not ascended : We 
reply, it is the same ' me' that was to be with the thief 
in Paradise. 5. Supposing the theory true that is taught 
by some of our "learned" theologians, that the soul of 
Christ went to a hell, as defined by them, burning with 
fire and brimstone, and preached to the damned immortal 
souls he found there, during the three days and three 
nights that he was dead, How could he, at the same 
time be with the thief in Paradise, in a garden of de- 
lights, even supposing that Paradise did exist ? 6. But 
supposing that the Scripture doctrine is the only true 


one, and that Chiist truly died, that his soul — or what is 
the same thing, himself — was in ' sheoP or ' hades' — 
which means a state of death — How could any part of 
him, whether, soul, body, or spirit, as a living thing, be 
with the living thief, or with any living part of the thief 
in Paradise, on that day, or any day while both were 
dead ? 7. Supposing the soul of Christ continued to 
live in Paradise with the thief immediately after the 
Scripture says he died, How then did Christ die at all ? 
or how did he give his " life" for the world ? How 
could he then be raised fro7Ji the dead on the third day, 
seeing that he never died ? 8. As the legs of the thief 
were not broken till " after the lighting of the Sabbath 
candles," which did not take place according to some, 
until twenty-five-and-a-quarter hours, or in the opinion of 
others, one-and-a-quarter hours after the expiration of 
that day — and as the breaking of the legs was not in- 
tended to cause immediate death, but to prevent recovery 
— How could the thief, while hanging alive upon the cross, 
and Christ who was dead during the three remaining 
hours of that day, be in any other place than on the 
cross ? 9. And now we ask. Will not the true answers 
to these questions make it very evident that the comma 
has been placed on the wrong side of the words " to- 
day" ? 

Stops, be it remembered, are no part of inspiration. 
The Greek Scriptures were originally written in solid 
blocks of capital letters, without division into sentences, 
or stops to mark clauses of sentences, and without even 
division into words. The stops are a comparatively re- 
cent addition of about the tenth century. The stops 
would therefore necessarily be made to conform to the 
theology of him who made the addition. In the margin, 
(^riesbach puts the stop after * to-day.' The sense of 
the passage is evidently something hke this. The thief 
prayed, " Lord, remember me in the day of thy coming. 
And Jesus said unto him. Verily, I say unto you this 
day, fthe day of my coming,) thou shalt be with me 
in Paradise." Or, if the request of the thief be truly re- 
corded in the common version, then the answer of Christ 
probably was, "Verily I say unto thee this day, (or at 
this time I promise thee) that thou shalt be with me in 
Paradise." Which would be equal to, " Now I say unto 


thee thou shalt be with me in Paradise, when I come in 
my kingdom." At all events, the thief and our Savior 
referred to the same period oi time, and as the thief de- 
fines the period as the time of Christ's second coming, so 
evidently does Jesus refer to that period as the time when 
the promise should be fulfilled. Remember the request 
of the thief was to be remembered when Christ came, not 
when Christ went away. 

To shew that ^ to-day^ and ^ this day^ are often used 
merely to express present time, we might quote thirty- 
five instances from the single book of Deuteronomy. Ex- 
amples : — 30 : 11, " For this commandment which I com- 
mand thee this day^ it is not hidden from thee." 15 v, 
" See I have set before thee this day^ life and good, and 
death and evil ; in that I command thee this day to love 
the Lord thy God"...." But if thy heart turn away.. ..and 
worship other Gods.. ..I denounce unto you this day^ that 
ye shall surely perish." Suppose we were to take the 
same liberty with this last verse, as the translators have 
taken in the verse under examination, and remove the 
comma from the proper side of the words ^ this day^ 
then it will read, " I denounce unto you that, this day ye 
shall surely perish." Which is equal to, " I denounce 
unto you that ye shall surely perish this day^ But the 
intelligent must perceive that this shifting of the comma 
makes a shameful perversion of the sense, for the perish- 
ing was evidently to take place at a future period, the 
period of their apostacy. But this is not a greater per- 
version, than the perversion of the meaning of our text, 
which makes Christ say, that the thief should be with 
him that day in Paradise. See a similar example in Deut 
8:19. The words to-day are used to represent present 
time also in Ps. 95 : 7; Heb. 3 : 7, 13 ; 4:7; 13 : 8 ; 
Mat 6 : 30 ; Luke 19 : 42 ; and many other places. We 
leave it for others to prove the geimineness of this text, 
and to reconcile it with other plain Scriptures, which 
will be found a hopeless task. 


Luke 9 : 26 ; Mat. 16 : 28 ; Eev. 19 : 11 ; 21:1; Mark 
9 : 1 , " For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my 
words, of him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when 


he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and 
of the holy angels. But I tell you of a truth, there be 
some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till 
they see the kingdom of God. And it came to pass 
about an eight days after these sayings, he took Peter, 
and John, and James, and went up into a mountain to 
pray. And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance 
was altered, and his raiment was white and glistening. 
And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were 
Moses and Elias : who appeared in glory, and spake of 
his decease which he should accomphsh at Jerusalem. 
But Peter and they that were with him ivere heavy with 
sleep : and when they were awake, they saw his glory, 
and the two men that stood with him. And it came to 
pass, as they departed from him, Peter said unto Jesus, 
Master, it is good for us to be here : and let us make 
three tabernacles ; one for thee, and one for Moses, and 
one for Elias : TWt knowing what he said. While he thus 
spake, there came a cloud and overshadowed them : and 
they feared as they entered into the cloud. And there 
came a voice out of the cloud, saying. This is my beloved 
Son : hear him. And when the voice was past, Jesus 
was found alone. And they kept it close, and told no 
man in those days any of those things which they had 
seen." Matthew adds, " Till they see the Son of Man 
coming in his kingdom." And, "Tell the vision to no 
man till the Son of Man be risen from the dead." Mark 
adds, " For he wist not ivhat to say ; for they were sore 
afraid." " And he charged them that they should tell 
no man what things they had seen, till the Son of Man 
were risen from the dead." The Syriac reads, Luke 19 : 
32, " And those that were with him were oppressed tvitk 
droivsiness ; and being scarcely aivahe^ they saw his glor}', 
and those two men who stood near him." 

From this passage it has been inferred, 1. That the 
kingdom of God was set up in the days of the Apostles. 
And, 2. That Moses was present in a spiritual nature 
with Christ on the mount, and therefore that the dead 
are conscious. To the first objection, we reply, that it 
is recorded in Eev. 19: 11, and 21 : 1, John saw in 
VISION the kingdom of God, after a series oi future pro- 
phetic events had transpired. And in the preceding re- 
lation, Peter, James, and John, saw in vision a minature 


representation of the kingdom. A vision sometimes 
bears such a resemblance to reahty that Peter was in 
doubt on another occasion where he supposed a real oc- 
currence w^as a vision. See Acts 13:9. As we have 
no account of the death of Elijah, the fact of his personal 
appearance on the mount can in no way affect the ques- 
tion. Eespecting Moses, we observe that his miraculous 
appearance in vision does not imply his personal appear- 
ance, much less his appearance as a living disembodied 
spirit : which, according to our opponents' own showing, 
would have been invisible and intangible, and as we aver, 
the offspring of their own fancy. If Moses was person- 
ally there, he must have been raised from the dead, for 
God himself declared. Josh. 1 : 2, That, '^ Moses my ser- 
vant is dead." That Moses was not there, excepting in 
vision, is further evident from the fact that the appear- 
ance of the three was as though they had assumed their 
glorified, incorruptible, or resurrection bodies ; whereas, 
Jesus was not yet glorified, and had not at that time as- 
sumed his resurrection body ; and Jesus was \h% first to 
manifest this life and incorruption, 2 Tim. 1:10^ when, 
at a subsequent period^ he had risen from the dead. And, 
as the vision had no counterpart till this took place, Je- 
sus said to the disciples, (Mat. 17: 9; Mark 9,) "Tell 
the vision to no man, until the Son of Man be risen again 
from the dead." As Jesus is the first\iOv\\. from the 
dead, with an incorruptible nature, and the^rs^-fruits ot 
those that are to be raised to incorruption ; and as Je- 
sus had not become the ^ first-horn^ or ^first-fruits^ at 
that period ; and as he was the first to be glorified — 
" for in all things he was to have the pre-eminence" — 
therefore, Moses, Elijah, and even Christ, were glorified, 
at that time, only in appearance^ for special objects. One 
of which seems to have been to show to these disciples, 
that the authority of Moses and the Prophets as law- 
givers, was entirely to be superceded by Jesus Christ, at 
his resurrection ; as though a voice from heaven had 
said, " When Christ is glorified^ hear not Moses, nor 
Elijah, nor the Prophets, as authoritative law-givers ; 
but this is my beloved Son, hear ye him, as your only 
accredited law-giver from the period of his glorification." 
" All power in heaven and on earth is given unto me. Go 
ye, THEREFORE, and teach all nations." Moses might 


have been raised for this special occasion, but not in his 
incorruptible or immortal nature, which he could only 
have in appearance ; and if such were the case, which 
we think not, then he died again; for he certainly did 
not rise with his immortal nature till after Jesus Christ 
— the first-fruits of the resurrection — tO " life and incor- 

Moreover, let it be remembered, Moses died as a 
punishment for his transgression, "Because he trespassed 
against the Lord, among the children of Israel at the wa- 
ters of Meribah-Kadesh, in the wilderness of Zin;" al- 
though he was desirous of entering into the promised 
land, and petitioned, " I pray thee, let me go over, and 
see the good land that is beyond Jordan, that goodly 
mountain and Lebanon;" but the Lord suffered him not 
to enter there then, but only to see it with his eyes and 
die on Mount Nebo outside the promised inheritance ; 
but the mount of transfiguration w^as within the promised 
inheritance. See Deut. 3 : 23-29 ; 4 : 21, 22; 33 : 49- 
52 ; 34 : 1-10 ; 1 : 37 ; Num. 20 : 12, 24, 26 ; 27 : 12-14 ; 
Ps. 106 : 32, 33. All of which refer to the death of 
Moses as a punishment, for " the Lord was wroth with 
him... .and would not hear him," and said unto him, " Let 
it suflSce thee ; speak no more unto me of this matter. 
Get thee up into the top of Pisgah....and behold it with 
thine eyes: for thou shalt not go over this Jordan^ 
Moses said, " Also the Lord was angry with me, for 
your sakes, saying. Thou shalt not go in thither." We 
are therefore justified in concluding that Moses did not 
go into the promised land at the first advent of Christ, 
nor will he, till he enter it in common with all the chil- 
dren of Grod, at the second advent of Messiah. ^ 

Now may we be permitted to ask the popular up- 
holders of the current theology a few questions? (1.) 
If the heaven to which popular theologians consign ' 'im- 
mortal souls' at the death of what is termed ' the body,' 
be so much more glorious than was old Canaan, will they 
condescend to explain why Moses did not rather choose 
to die on Mount Nebo, and go immediately to this more 
glorious heaven, than to pray so fervently that he might 
enter into and live in old Canaan ? If their theory were 
true, then his " death was the gate of heaven." (2.) 
Why was the exchange of old Canaan for glory, and 


earth for heaven, said by God, himself, to be a punish" 
merit to Moses for his trespass, and why was Moses so 
loathe to make the exchange ? (3.) Is not all this posi- 
tive proof that the man Moses^ as a whole^ as a unit, died 
on Mount Nebo ? And, if he has had no resurrection 
since, then Moses is still sleeping in the dust, and his ap- 
pearance and talking with Christ was only a vision, as 
Jesus declared it to be. (4.) If good men go to heaven 
at death, then God took Moses to heaven to punish him 
for his trespass ; and then, why not every transgressor 
go to heaven to punish them for their trespasses ? When 
the theologians have answered these questions satisfac- 
torily, they will please answer the following before they 
plume themselves with the truth of their respective and 
conflicting creeds. (5.) If the Jews beheved that 
the dead are alive in any sense, when Christ, in Luke 8 : 
52, told them that the maid " was not dead but sleepeth," 
Why did they laugh him to scorn, *' knowing that she 
was dead" ? (6.) Why did the Jews, Luke 9 : 7, say of 
Christ, that John, or one of the old prophets, had risen 
from the dead ? for if they were alive, they could appear 
without rising from the dead, and if alive they could not 
rise from the dead !! Some said, that Elijah had appear- 
ed, whom they did not suppose to be dead ; but they do 
not say that he had risen from the dead. (7.) If the beg- 
gar, Lazarus, was alive among the living in heaven. How 
could he arise from the dead, and go from the dead to 
warn the living ? (8.) Why did the Jews tell Christ that 
he had a devil only for saying that if a man keep my say- 
ings he should never see death ? (9.) And why were 
they so incensed when Chri&t told them that " Abraham 
rejoiced to see his day, and he saw it, and was glad" ? 
Whereas you suppose they believed that Abraham was 
in heaven and could see what transpired upon the earth. 
John 8:51. (10.) When Hezekiah was told to set his 
house in order, for he should die and not live, why did 
the pious king cry and weep, and chatter like a swallow? 
or, why did he dislike to die, if he beheved he should 
enter heaven at death ? See Isa. 38 : 1-14. (11.) Why 
did David, Ps. 102 : 24, pray, " O my God, take me not 
away in the midst of my days" ? For he must have 
surely esteemed it far better for him to go to heaven than 
to live longer upon earth, if he had believed in the current 


philosophy. (12.) David said, " I will sing untoH^d^ord 
as long as I live, while I live will I praise the 1t*Qrd," 
AVhy does not David give us the least hint of praising 
the Lord when he is dead ? Why say, " For in death 
there is no remembrance of thee : in the grave, who shall 
give thee thanks ?" Ps. 6:5; 115:17; 146:2. Would 
God tell David in Sam, 7:12, that '* he should sleep with 
his fathers,'^ if he knew that David would at death awake 
with his fathers in heaven ? (13.) Why did Christ tell 
his disciples, " I go to my Father, and ye see me no 
more,'^ if he knew that they at death would see him in 
heaven? John 16: 10. (14.) If the righteous are re- 
warded as soon as they die. Why does Christ say that 
they " shall be recompensed at the resurrection of the 
just^' ? And why does Solomon say of the dead, " Nei- 
ther have they any more a reward"? Luke 14* 14; 
Ecc. 9 : 5. (15.) If the righteous are rewarded in hea- 
ven and not on the new earth. Why does God say, " Be- 
hold the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth, 
much more the wicked and the sinner?' Prov. 11 : 31. 
(16.) If the wicked are to be punished in a hell that is 
not upon this earth, how is it that they receive their 
recompense upon the earth, and much more so than the 
righteous, who are to inherit the earth for ever ? How 
then could God say, that " he will punish the kings of 
the earth upon the earth ?" Isa. 24 : 21. Is not this 
plain proof that he will burn up the wicked upon the old 
earth, and recompense the righteous in the new earth ? 
(17.) If all go to heaven or hell when they die, How 
could the four leprous men say, when they had deter- 
mined to enter the camp of the enemy, " If they save us 
alive, we shall live ; and if they kill us we shall but die ?" 
2 Kings 7 : 4, For the going to heaven or hell, they 
would have considered a greater event than to die. (18.) 
In Mat. 7 : 22, and Luke 13 : 25, it is written, " Many 
will say to me in that clay^ Lord, Lord, have we not pro- 
phesied in thy name ?" &c« " And knock at the door, 
saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us." If these, at death, 
had been consigned to a hell of fire. Would they have 
come up, smoking with tire and brimstone, with the de- 
luded expectation of getting into heaven, and crave ad- 
mittance, and plead their wonderful works which they 
had done in the name of Christ, after they had expe- 


rienced this terrible foretaste of God's displeasure? 
(19.) If death means endless misery, of the most intense 
kind, Why is it said of the wicked, as in Eev. 9:6, " In 
those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; 
and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them ?" 
Did they desire to exchange protracted earthly suffer- 
ings, for severer endless sufferings ? (20.) If the pro- 
phet Jonah beheved that the wicked go to a place of in- 
tense torment at death. How dared he, in a fit of stub- 
born anger, pray to God, " Take my life from me, for it 
is better for me to die than to live" ? (21.) If the right- 
eous are written, that is, enrolled in heaven, as says Paul 
in Heb. 12 : 23, and if to be blotted out of this book of 
life, implies endless misery in hell. How dare Moses say 
to God, " Blot me I pray thee, out of the book that thou 
hast written" ? Ex. 32 : 32. Is it not plain that Moses 
had no idea of eternal misery resulting as a consequence 
of being blotted out of the book of life? (22.) Could 
Paul have wished himself accursed from Christ for his 
brethren, his kinsmen according to the flesh, if he knew 
that this would expose him to a hell burning with brim- 
stone, in which he would continue conscious for ever ? 
Rom. 9 : 3. It is impossible that Paul thus wished. The 
learned confess this, and therefore make labored and 
fruitless efforts, to explain away the plain and literal 
meaning of God's word. But if these same learned 
^* divines" were but to spend half their eflbrts to explain 
their own absurdities, and were to cast away their own 
inventions about ^ immortal souls,' and ^ deathless spirits,' 
and ' endless misery,' and ^ going to a heaven at death,* 
that is ^ beyond the bounds of time and space'— with 
other hke traditions of men — they would find but little 
difficulty with the self sacrificing love of Moses and of 
Paul for their countrymen. (23.) Are not the theories 
of the ' natural immortality of the soul,' of ^ endless tor- 
ment,' the ^ spirit land,' and the kindred fancies, univer- 
sally believed by the professed church ? And did not 
our Savior say, Luke 18 : 8, " Nevertheless when the 
Son of Man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth ?" 
Is there not, therefore, presumptive evidence, that the 
belief of these fables constituted the predicted state of 
the professed church prior to the coming of the Lord ? 
To the dragon is ascribed the deceiving of the whole 


world ; but to these false prophets, that is, these pro- 
pounders of false doctrines, is ascribed the " deceiving of 
«iy people." It will be time enough to present a few 
snore questions, when these are satisfactorily answered, 


We have now replied to the principal objections 
brought against those views which we have shown to be 
truth. We have likewise harmonized all those Scrip- 
tures wath the general tenor of the whole Bible, which 
have been perverted, by a popular theology, so as to fa- 
vor the fables we are opposing, with the exception of the 
Parable of the rich man and Lazarus, which will come 
under revision in its proper place : and we have pre- 
sented more than three thousand plain texts of Scrip- 
tures which are in direct opposition to the particular 
theories w^e are opposing. We have shown that there is 
not one single text in the whole Bible, which, properly 
explained, affords the shadow of sound argument for the 
prevalent and popular fables. There is not a text in the 
whole Bible that will prove the separate existence of the 
«oul, nor the separate existence of a conscious spirit, 
either mortal or immortal, in man or beast. There is 
not a single text that even intimates that soul, spirit, or 
thoughts, as conscious things, leave tlie body at death, 
*o exist in any otlier world. Will the lovers of truth 
permit a few inferences — which we have shown to be 
improperly drawn from a very few passages of Scripture 
—to become the standard of truth, although contradicted 
by thousands of plaintexts? and although there are 
thousands of other plain texts that explicitly teach the 
very opposite of these inferences ? 




Mat. 10 : 28, " Pear not them which kill the body, but 
are not able to kill the soul : but rather fear him which 
is able to destroy both soul and body in helL" 

The word ivsii^\2itedkil\^apoktemd,fram apo mtensw&j. 
and kteinoy to kill, implies cruelty and violence, equal to 
murder ; apolesai, to destroy, in the sense of putting out 
of existence ; body is sometimes used in the sense of be- 
ing, and psuche, is often translated life-. Gehenna means 
the valley of Hinnom. So the text will bear this trans- 
lation — " Pear not those who are only able to murder the 
body, but are not able to destroy the life, or being ; but 
rather fear him who is able to destroy both life and be- 
ing in the valley of Hinnom." See Jam. 4 : 12, ^^'^ There? 
is one law-giver who is able to save and to destroy." The 
parallel place in Luke 12: 4, reads, "Be not afraid oi 
them that kill the body, and after that have no more that 
they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall 
fear : Pear him, who after he hath killed hath power to 
cast into Gehenna ; yea^ I say unto you,, fear him." 

The almost universal belief of the different sect^ 
throughout Christendom is, that there is now existing 
somewhere, a lake burning with fire and brimstone ; or 
a hell into which the souls of all the wicked, separated 
from their bodies, are plunged at death, and that they 
are tormented in this place, before the general judgment- 
That prior to the general judgment, these souls are again 
* reunited' to their bodies, which bodies^ some affirm, are 
then made as immortal as the ghosts, and thus appear 
before the tribunal of judgment to receive their final 


' 3oom ; 'vvhence they are remanded back again to their 
old place of torment, to writhe in the most intense 
misery, without any intermission, for ever and ever. 
Thus representing that many of these criminals are 
punished thousands of years before they are judged ! Of 
course, some of the sects will vary a little respecting the 
details, but this embraces the general features of what is 
usually taught by * the orthodox' !!I Well might Mr. 
Dobney exclaim, " Tremendous orthodoxy this, my bre- 
thren !" These rehcs of paganism, papacy, and purga- 
tory, are still taught, in this nineteenth century, as the 
veritable teachings of the book of God ; and supposed to 
be necessary to induce men to refrain from vice, to love 
God, and to enter into sectarian churches. It is to be 
feared that there are not a few, who — though convinced 
that these things are fables — ^for the love of popularity, 
and perhaps by the more sordid love of gain, do not lift 
up their voices in execration against such infamous blas- 
phemy against a God of love, and justice !! 

In exposing these human traditions, we shall take up 
the subject as follows : — First^ Describe the different 
kinds of hell believed in by men. Second^ Show the na- 
ture of the hell of the Bible. Third ^ Prove from the 
Bible what will be the final destiny of the wicked. 

Most nations believe that hell, as defined by them- 
selves, is already in existence, and there are five hells 
that have obtained a prominence : (1.) The Pagan hell; 
(2.) The Mahomedan hell; (3.) The Eoman Catholic 
hell ; (4.) The Protestant hell ; and (5.) The proper hell 
of the Bible. We proceed to describe — 


The Pagan hell is usually described as a wide dark 
cave under ground. The entrance to it is down a steep 
and rocky descent. Then a gloomy grove. After that 
a lake called Avernus, from which such poisonous vapors 
arise^ that if a bird fly over it, it is poisoned and dies. 
Beyond the grove and lake, at the entrance of hell, seve- 
ral monsters are placed, who bring men to death and de- 
struction. These are said to increase the inhabitants of 
hell. Their names are, Care, Sorrow, Disease, Old Age, 
Frights, Famines, Wants, Labor, Sleep, Death, Sting of 


Conscience, Force, Fraud, Strife, and Fear. At the 
side of the lake an old man named Charon, or the Ferry 
Man, stands in his boat to carry the souls across the 
lake. On the shore the souls appear in flocks, and those 
whose bodies were buried, go over the lake when their 
bodies die ; the others wander about the shore a hundred 
years, and then are carried over. Charon is considered 
the god of that dreary place. All the souls pay a small 
piece of money to Charon for being ferried across the 
lake. The heathen say, there are four rivers that run 
through hell. The first is the river Acheron. Acheron, 
a son of Zera, born in a cave, because he could not en- 
dure the light ran down into hell, and was changed into 
a river of bitter water. The second river is called Styx ; 
rather a lake than a river. Styx was the fabled daugh- 
ter of Oceanus, and was changed into the Stygian lake 
by which the gods swore, and kept their oaths. The 
third river is called Cocytus, and runs out of the Stygian 
lake, and groans and laments to imitate the bowlings of 
the damned, and increase their exclamations. The fourth 
river is called Phlegethon, so called because it swells 
with waves of fire, and all its streams are flames. 

All these rivers the souls must pass over and then 
they arrive at the Palace of Pluto, the god of hell. The 
gate of Pluto is guarded by Cerebus, a dog with three 
heads, whose hair is living snakes. He is considered the 
porter of hell. Saturn gave his son Pluto this infernal 
dominion, because he invented burying, and funeral 
mourning. He likewise reigns over death. He sits up- 
on his throne in the dark, holding a key instead of a 
sceptre. He is crowned with ebony. Pluto, which 
signifies wealth, is king. The Greeks call him Hades ; 
or gloom, darkness, or melancholy. He was sometimes 
called Agelatos, because he drives people to the infernal 
regions ; Agelastos, because he refrains from laughter. 
Summanus, or chief of the infernal deities. (It would 
appear that the Greeks meant either death or the grave 
by their word ^ hades,'') Pluto, it is said, has a queen 
named Prosepine, who enjoys the infernal regions with 
him. There are three old women called /a^^s, ordering 
the past, the present, and the future. They fix every- 
thing so that nothing can be altered to eternity. To 
them is entrusted the management of the fatal thread of 


life. Clotho gives us life; Lachesis determines what 
shall befall us here ; and Atropos concludes our lives. 
In hell are likewise three furies, who punish the wicked, 
and torment the consciences of secret offenders. There 
is likewise an inferior god, called Nox, represented as a 
skeleton w^ith black wings. Another god is called Sa- 
monus, or sleep ; he is thought useful to men. There 
are three judges in this hell, which judge the souls which 
come there. There are some giants and some kings 
there. All are doomed to endless existence in misery. 
Pheleggus, a king, burned the temple of Apollo ; he was 
condemned to remain in hell for ever, with a great stone 
hung over his head, which he expects every moment to 
fall upon him, and crush him to pieces. (So he sits eter- 
nally fearing that w^hich will never come to pass.) Ixion 
for his crime, w^as struck down to hell with thunder, and 
tied fast to a wheel, which will eternally turn him round. 
A robber is condemned to roll a great stone to the top 
of a hill, which invariably slips down before he reaches 
the top. 

In this hell there was a place called the Elysium. This, 
though in the dominion of Pluto, was a region of de- 
hghts. To this region resorted the souls of the good, 
after being purged from the hght offences committed in 
this world. (Here is the origin of purgatory, and of the 
spirit land, and perhaps of the paradise, as at present 
supposed to exist.) Elysium has verdant fields, shady 
groves, fine breezes, and all fine things. There is like- 
wise a river called Lethe, causing forgetfulness to all 
who drink of its waters of all their former troubles. This 
is but a short description of the Pagan hell. See Toole' s 
Pantheon^ p. 219. 

We may here trace the origin of the superstitious 
practice of placing a piece of money in the hands of the 
dead, to pay Peter instead of Charon. Here, too, we 
may trace the origin of the ideas of an already existing 
hell as a place for living souls, of purgatory, of paradise, 
and of other errors. The location of this hell is not 
clearly defined. Homer assumes the place of the dead 
to be a land at the extremity of the ocean^ attainable by 
navigation ; Virgil, a region, attainable only by descend- 
ing into tJie bowels of the earth Compare Odyssey, 1 1 , 


and JSneid, 6 : from whence the fkble has crept into the 
professed church. 


The Alcoran describes a last judgment, where all will 
be judged according to their works. The trial being 
over and the assembly dissolved ; those who are awarded 
to Paradise, take the right hand way ; while those that 
are destined to hell fire, take the left hand. But both 
must pass the bridge Alsirat, which is laid over the mid- 
dle of hell, which bridge is finer than a hair, and sharper 
than a sword. The wicked miss their footing and fall 
headlong into hell. This hell has seven gates. The 
first for Mussulmen ; the second for Christians ; the 
third for Jews ; the fourth for the Sabians ; the fifth 
for the Magicians ; the sixth for Pagans ; and the seventh 
and worst of all, for the hypocrites of all rehgions. The 
inhabitants of this hell will sufier a variety of torments 
of eternal duration ; with the exception of those who 
have embraced the true religion ; such will be delivered 
from hell after having expiated their crimes by suffer- 
ing. — Adams* View of Religions ^ p. 322. 


The Papist describes hell as a place burning with fire, 
in which the wicked, dying out of ' the church,' will be 
eternally tormented. They hold likewise to a place of 
purgation, called purgatory. This was taken from the 
Pagans, and is the same thing under another name. Mo- 
sheim says, vol. 2, p. 38, — *' The famous Pagan doctrine 
concerning the purification of departed souls, by means 
of a certain kind of fire, was more amply explained and 
confirmed now than it had formerly been. And in the 
tenth century, the people dreaded the fire of purgatory, 
more than they did the fire of hell ; for they supposed 
that by being enriched with the prayers of the clergy 
when they were dying, they should certainly escape hell. 
But they were taught that if they went to purgatory, it 
was a matter of doubt whether they ever should be de- 
livered from that dreadful place." 

Yea, it is an historical fact that the priests led the pec- 


pie astray, and that for the sake of filthy lucre. Therefore, 
■*' Try the spirits whether they be of God : because many 
false prophets, (or propouaders of false doctrines) have 
gone out into the world," And while you despise not 
prophesyings, prove all things, and hold fast only that 
which i^ good, 


We now propose to describe ttie hell which those call- 
ed Christians believe in, as a place of the most intense 
misery, without mitigation, and without end. We have 
«een that the Pagans, the Mahomedans, and the Catho- 
lics, hold to a hell that has a place to purify at least a 
portion of those that are cjist into it. But we know of 
but one :&eet of Protestants who believe in this part of 
Paganism. That one, is a sect of the Universahsts ; and 
for this they are indebted to the heathen. But while 
Protestanism borrows the Roman Cathohc hell, a little 
modified from the Pagan, they reject its better feature, 
the chauce for a few to escape its fabled horrors. 

As Mr. Benson is the acknowledged standard ortho- 
dox writer of Methodism, his description will suffice for 
the Protestant hell. Hear him — ^* God is present in hell 
in his infinite justice, and almighty wrath, as an unfathom- 
able sea of liquid fire^ wiiere the wicked must drink in 
everlasting torture. The presence of God in his ven- 
geance, scatters darkness and woe through the dreary 
regions of misery. As heaven would be bo heaven if 
Ood did not there manifest his love : so hell would be 
no hell if God did not there display his wrath. It is the 
presence of God which gives everything virtue and effi- 
cacy ; without which there can be no life, no sensibility, 
lao powder. God is therefore himself present in hell to 
see the punishment of those rebels against his govern- 
ment, that it may be adequate to the infinitude of their 
guilt. His fiery indignation kindles, and his incensed 
fury feeds the flames of their torments^- while his power- 
fill presence and operation maintains their being, and 
renders ail their powei*s more acutely sensible ; thus set- 
ting the keenest edge upon their pain, and making it cut 
niosl intolerably deep. He will exert all his divine at- 
tributes to make them as wretched as the capacity of^ 
their being will adn;it" 


After this, the Doctor goes on to describe the duratioa 
of this work of God, and calls to his aid all the stars, and 
sand, and drops of water, and makes each one tell a mil- 
lion of ages, and when all these ages have rolled away^ 
he goes over the same number again, and again,, and so 
on for ever. 

If this description were not the result of the grossest 
ignorance, we should be obliged to characterize it as the 
worst of blasphemy. Perhaps all the * orthodox' Pro- 
testants will not endorse the Doctor's definition of the 
torments of hell ; but they will all agree with him in two 
particulars ; that these torments are of a most excrucia- 
ting character, and that their duration is eternal. In 
this horrible account of the work of God in tormenting 
the work of his own hands, we find no passage of Scrip- 
ture quoted to prove any of its points. We will venture 
the assertion that there is not a text to be found that 
leans that way. Nay, more ; that it flatly contradicts 
God's own statement, Job 37 : 23, " Touching the Al- 
mighty, we cannot find him out ; he is excellent in power, 
and in judgment, and in plenty of justice he will not af- 
flict. Wherefore let mortals reverence him, whom none 
of the wise in heart can discern." But this wise Doctor 
professes to have found out that God is dehghting him- 
self continually in horrible and revolting injustice towards 
those ' immortal souls,' which some contend are a part 
of God himself. We could produce many other texts 
that this account contradicts, but content ourselves ak 
present by quoting Ps. 145: 9, '-^ The Lord is good to 
all ; and his tender mercies are over all his works." Lam. 
3 : 33, " For he doth not afilict willingly, nor grieve the 
children of men. To crush under his feet all the prison- 
ers of the earth." Ez. 33 : 11, *' As I live, saith the Lord 
God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked." 
If God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, in the 
extinction of their being, how can he have pleasure in 
exercising his powers to produce protracted and intense 
suflering, conscious sufiering, without mercy and with- 
out end ? Nah. 1:9," What do ye imagine against the 
Lord ? He will make an utter end : affliction shall not 
rise up a second time." Isa. 10 : 25, " For yet a very 
little while, and the indignation shall cease, and mine an- 
ger in their destruction." We trace the Protestant hell, 


first to the Pagan notion of the immortality of the soul ; 
secondly^ to the Eoman Catholic hell ; and thirdly^ to a 
misconception of some passages of Scriptures which 
would not have been perverted, but for the beUef of the 
other two. 


The Bible does indeed reveal a hell, but not by any 
means such a one as will correspond with any of the pre- 
ceding. We shall closely examine all those terms that 
have been supposed to mean hell, as a place of protracted 
suffering. The terms are : — Hell — Pit — Bottomless 
Pit — Prison — Grave — Nether or lower parts of the 
earth — Shevah — Kever — Sheol — Hades — Gehenna— To- 
phet — Tartarus — Lake of fire and brimstone — ^Unquench- 
able fire. 


This word is now generally understood to mean a 
place in which the damned are perpetually tormented ; 
the orthodox hell corresponds with the Tartarus of the 
ancient heathen. But originally hell had a mild and 
harmless signification. It is of Saxon origin, and is de- 
rived from the verb helan^ and was spelled hele^ helle^ 
hell^ heile^ and helan. It meant, to hele, or to hell, heal, 
hill, shell, hulk, shovel, shiel, shield, shawl, i. e., to cover 
up, to hide. The word in its primitive form is still re- 
tained in the eastern^ and especially the western counties 
of England; and means something hidden or covered, 
the grave. To hele over a thing is to cover it. The 
word hell is still retained in the English liturgy, according 
to the old English translation oi sheol ^ in Ps. 49 : 14 ; 55: 
16 ; 88 : 2 ; 89 : 47 ; it is now altered in these places to 
grave. Those who wish to trace this word hell to its 
origin may consult Lord Kingh History of the Creed, 
ch. 4 ; Doddridge on Eev. 1 : 18 ; Leigh'' s Crit. Sacr. in 
haides ; Junius^ Etymolog. Anglican in Heile and Hele ; 
and Dr. Clarke, Mat. 11 : 23. The Dr. says, hell comes 
from the Saxon helan^ to cover ^ or hide ; hence the tihng 
or slating of a house is called in Cornwall, heling, to this 
day ; and in Lancashire the covers of books are SQ called, 


The first translators of the Bible undoubtedly meant by 
hell^ a covered or unseen place, the grave, and perhaps 
sometimes the state of death ; making the word synono- 
mous with the Hebrew sheol^ and the Greek hades ; and 
never designed it to represent a place of conscious suf- 
fering : that is a refinement of modern days. The word 
occurs fifty-two times in the common translation. It is 
translated from the words sheol^ hades^ gehenyva^ and tar- 
tarus. But as we design to investigate the meaning of 
every original word bearing upon our subject, this ac- 
count of the English word hell will suflSce. 


The word Pit as a place of deposit for the dead, only 
means the grave. The word occurs more than seventy 
times in the O. T., and is translated from ten different 
Hebrew words. It will only be necessary to examine 
three, as having any allusion to death, sheol^ the grave, 
as a general term, or the state of death; shokhath, de- 
struction ; and I)our^ pit. 

Ez. 32 : 23, " Whose {kever) graves are set in the sides 
of the {hour) pit." Ps. 30 : 9, " Lord,....what profit is 
there in my blood, when I go down to {shokhath) [de- 
struction]? Shall the dust praise thee ? Shall it declare 
thy truth" ? SJwkhath is here translated pit. Ps. 9 : 
15, " The heathen are sunk down in the {shokhath) [de- 
struction] that they made : in the net which they hid is 
their own foot taken." Ps. 35 : 7, " For without cause 
have they hid for me their net {slwkhath) [destruction] ; 
without cause they have digged for my soul." Ps. 94 : 
13, " That thou may est give him rest from the days of 
adversity, until {shokhath) destruction be cut out for the 
wicked." Isa. 38 : 17, " Thou hast in love to my soul, 
delivered it from {shokhath) destruction." Well might the 
translators translate shokhath^ pit^ in this place to con- 
ceal the fact that if the pious Hezekiah had died at that 
time, his soul would have been destroyed until the resur- 
rection. Isa. 51 : 14, " The captive exile hasteneth that 
he may be loosed, and thai he should not die in {shok- 
hath) destruction, (or should not be destroyed,) nor that 
his bread should fail." Lam. 4 : 20, " The breath of our 
nostrils, the anointed of the Lord, was taken in their 


(shokhath) destruction^ of whom we said, Under his sha- 
dow we shall live among the heathen." This appears to 
be a prophecy, relating to the destruction of the being of 
Christ, till God raised him from the dead. 

Ez. 28: 8, '' They shall bring thee down to (shokhath) 
destruction, and thou shalt die the deaths of those that 
are slain in the midst of the seas." 

Job 33 : 

18, **He withdraweth his soul from (shokhath) destruction, 

And his life from perishing with a sword, 
24, Then will he entreat his favor, and say, 

Deliver him from going down to (shokhath) destruction. 
I have found a ransom. 

28, He hath redeemed my soul from (shokhath) destruction 
And my life has appeared in the light. 

29, Lo, all these things performeth God, 
Time after time with maa, 

30, To bring back his soul from destruction, (shokhath) ; 
To enlighten him with the light of the living."' 

Here are twelve places, where a word that means de- 
strttction^ has been improperly translated pit^ and so far 
is it from implying a state of conscious torment, that it 
five times expressly points out the destruction of the soul, 
and in all places imphes the destruction of being. See 
also Prov. 28: 10. 

Three times is the word sheol^ which means grave^ and 
a state of death^ translated pit. 

Job 17: [my home; 

13, " When I would hope, (sheol) the mansion of the dead is 

In darkness I spread my bed. 
14,1 say to corruption. Thou art my father! 

My mother ! and my sister ! to the worm. 
15, Ah! where is that which 1 long for? 

Ay, that which I long for — Who can see it ? 
16, Into the depth of sheol shall I descend, 

When we are together in the dust.** 

Common Version, — ^^ They shall go down to the bars 
of (sheol) the pit, when our rest together (i. e., with cor- 
ruption and worms) is in the dust. 

Num. 16 : 30, 33, " But if the Lord make a new thing, 
and the earth open her mouth and swallow them up, with 



all that appertain unto them, and they go down quickly 
into sheol ; then shall ye understand that these men have 
provoked the Lord.... And they and all that appertained 
to them, went down ahve into sheol^ and the earth closed 
upon them : and they perished from among the congre- 
gation." In these three places where sJieol is translated 
pit^ we perceive that death, corruption and entire de- 
struction are meant. The word she^ will receive fu .Iher 
attention. Ps. 30 : 3, reads, " Lord, thou hast brought 
up Qny soul from (sheol) the grave ; thou hast kept Qiie 
alive, that I should not go down to the [hour) pit^ 

Ps. 55 : 23, " But thou, O God,shalt bring them down 
into tne (beair) deep place of (shokhath) destruction ; 
bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their 
days." Zech. 9 : 11, " As for thee also, by the blood of 
thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the 
(bou7') pit wherein is no water." In the word />iY then, 
we find no indications of a place of conscious torment. 


The phrase, " bottomless pit," is used in our version 
as a synonym for the Greek word abussus^ which is from 
a, intensive, and bussus or butJws^ deep ; very deep ; 
abyss ; gulf; ocean ; sea ; and metaphorically, immense ; 
profound ; a wilderness. The corresponding word in 
Hebrew is tehouniy which occurs. Gen. 1:2; 7:11; 8 : 
2; 49: 25; Deut. 33: 13: Job38: 30; 41: 32; Ps. 36; 
6; 42:7; 104:6; Prov. 8:28; Isa>51:10; 63:13; 
Ez. 26 : 19 ; 31 : 4, 15 ; Amos 7:4; Hab. 3 : 10. Wq 
quote Gen. 49 : 25 : — 

" And by the Almighty, who shall bless thee 

With blessings of heaven above, 

Blessings of the [tehov/m — ahussus / shall we 

Call it " bottomless pit," or the sea? 

Or] deep that lieth under. 

Blessings of the breast and the womb: 

The blessings of thy father have prevailed 

Above the blessings of the perpetual mountains ; 

And the desirable things of the everlasting hills.** 

A prophecy relating to the descendants of Josei>h, 
probably the Anglo-Saxon race, who should ultimately 


become masters of the sea. In none of the above places, 
is there any idea presented that tehoum is a place of suf- 
fering ; it was not the blessings of the " bottomless pit," 
that the dying patriarch prophetically conferred upon 
his son Joseph ; neither is the term ever used as being 
the receptacle of any one class of the dead. 

Ps. 148 : 7, " Praise the Lord from the earth, ye dra- 
gons, and all deeps." Here the word tehoum occurs in 
the plural form, and is tr. deeps. There must then be 
more than one such place, and as they or their inhabitants 
are all called upon to praise God, so the word cannot 
mean a place of punishment. In Job 38 : 29, the word 
evidently means sea or ocean. " Out of whose womb 
came the ice ? And the hoar frost of heaven, who gen- 
dered it ? 30, That the waters should conceal them- 
selves as a stone, and the face of the deep should become 
fixed?" Job 41:31, Leviathan " maketh (metsoolah) 
the deep waters to boil hke a pot.. would think the 
tehoum to be hoary." It is here used as a synonym to 
deep waters. 

In the N. T. the word occurs without its intensive 
form about fourteen times ; it is usually translated deep : 
and with the intensive form it means very deep. We 
give a few examples. Lk. 5:4," Launch out into the 
deep?^ Kom. 11 : 33, • Q the c/e;?^ A of the riches both of 
the wisdom and knowledge of God !" John 4 : 11, '' The 
well is dxepy 2 Cor. 1 1 : 25, " A night and a day I have 
been in the deep^ We give all the places where the 
emphatic form abussos occurs. Luke 8 : 31, " They be- 
sought him that he would not command them to go out in- 
to the abussos^ Rom. 10:7, " Who shall descend into the 
abussos^ Here it seems used for the grave. To make 
abussos mean hades here, would be equal to, Who shall 
ascend to heaven ? and who shall enter into a state of 
death ? which would destroy the double antithesis. We 
need not descend to the grave, but only beheve " that 
God hath raised him from the dead," or from the grave. 
No sensible person supposes that Paul meant, we need 
not go down to '^ the bottomless pit," or to hell, to 
find Christ ! ! Rev. 9 : 1, " To him was given the key, 
tou phreatos tes abussos^ of the very deep cavern. And 
he opened the very deep cavern ; and there arose a 
smoke out of the cavern, as the smoke of a great furnace ; 


and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the 
smoke of the cavern." 11 v, "And they had a king 
over them, ton aggelon tes abusson^ the messenger of 
death, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Destruction ; 
but in the Greek his name is the Destroyer." We trans- 
late abussos here by death or hades. The prophecy 
seems to refer to the Buonapartean dynasty. Napoleon 
is said to have sent fifteen milUons to the grave. This is 
the only passage where abussus is joined with a word 
signifying pit, or cavern. 

Rev. 11:7," And when they shall have finished their 
testimony, the wild beast that ascendeth out of the 
{abussos) abyss shall make war against them, and shall 
overcome them, and kill them." Kev. 17:8," The wild 
beast that thou sawest, which was, but is not, will yet 
ascend out of theabyss^ (abussos) and go into destruction ; 
and they that dwell upon the earth, (whose names have 
not been written in the book of life from the foundation 
of the world,) will view with wonder and admiration, 
w^hen they see, that the wild beast that was, but is not, 
will yet be present." 

Rev. 20 : 1, " And I saw an angel come down from 
heaven, having the key of the 0^5505,.... and he cast the 
dragon into the abussos... X\\2Lt he should deceive the na- 
tions no more." We have now quoted all the places 
where abussos appears. In no place can it be found that 
wicked men are cast into the abussos^ in any other sense 
than into the grave ; neither does a pit without a bottom 
seem a suitable place for confinement, nor for torment- 
ing the living souls of dead men ; or as dead men and 
dead souls are synonomous expressions, we are justified 
in writing it so as to confute itself Abussos is not a 
suitable place to torment the living souls of dead souls, 
or the dead living souls ! ! Revelation speaks of the rise 
of two great powers : the Dragon deceives the habitable 
earth, the Roman Empire ; but the False Prophet, the 
propounder of false doctrines. Rev. 19 : 20, " deceiveth 
my people^'' tous emous: Vatican and Moscow. So the 
power that deceives the Roman Empire is difierent from 
those professed teachers of these latter days who " de- 
ceiveth mine, or my people" ; by preaching peradventure 
the very fables we are opposing. Will the reader pon- 


der and mark these popular preachers of false doctrines, 
and look for them around him ? 


The words rendered grave in the 0. T. are — I. Kever^ 
a grave or cavern, from kovar to cover, to bury, to 
hide ; 2. Ai or ee^ a ruin, waste, or heap ; 3. Shokhath, 
destruction ; and 4. Sheol^ which originally meant the 
grave, but afterwards became a general term, signifying 
the state of death. Ai is translated grave only in Job 
30 : 24 ; but in the margin it is rendered heap, Shok- 
hath is translated grave in Job 33 : 22. Kever is 
translated grave in about forty-seven places : Genesis 
35: 20; Exodus 14: 11; 2 Samuel 3 : 32 ; 19 : 37 ; 

1 Kings 13: 30; 14 : 13 ; 2 Kings 22: 20; 23: 6; 

2 Chron. 34 : 4, 28 ; Job 3 : 22 ; 5 : 26 ; 10:19; 14 : 13 ; 
17: 1; 21: 32; Ps. 88:5, 11; 141: 7; Isa. 53:9; 65: 
4; Jer. 8:1; 20 : 17 ; 26 : 23 ; Ez. 32 : 22, 23, 24, 25, 
26; 37 : 12, 13; 39 : 11 ; Na. 1 : 14. As only some of 
the dead are buried in their graves, (keverim, plural of 
kever,) but all the dead are in the state of death, of un- 
consciousness, all the dead are said to be in sheol. That 
sheol does not in the strictness of language mean grave, 
we shall demonstrate under that word. For the present 
we give but one instance where sheol is mistranslated 
grave. Gen. 37 : 33, 35, " And he knew it ; and said, 
my son's coat : an evil beast hath devoured him : Joseph 
is without doubt reyit inpieces„„And he said. For I will 
go down into sheol unto my son mourning." Mark, the 
pious patriarch says, Joseph is torn in pieces, is devoured ; 
yet he expects to be with him in sheol : sheol is there- 
fore neither the grave nor hell, as now understood, but 
the state of death. 

We shall have occasion to notice only one of the Greek 
words which are translated grave, namely, hades in 1 
Cor. 15 : 55. See Hades. Be it remembered tha-t the 
grave never represents a place of suflfering ; but of re- 
pose, of silence, of forgetfulness ; a place where there is 
no knowledge, nor device ; where all are indiscriminately 
consigned to nothingness and oblivion ; and to the entire 
annihilation of being, to all whom Christ has not ran- 
somed from the grave by a resurrection from the uncon- 


sciousness of death to an everlasting existence in his 


The word prison does not denote a receptacle in which 
the wicked will be tormented for ever. It sometimes oc- 
curs in the sense of grave : as in Isa. 42 : 1-7, " Behold 
my servant (the Christ,) whom I uphold ; mine elect in 
whom my soul delighteth. I, the Lord, have called thee 
in righteousness, and will hold thy hand, and will keep 
thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a 
light of the Gentiles ; to open the blind eyes (of the liv- 
ing) to bring out the prisoners (the dead,) from the pri- 
son (the grave,) [and] them that recline in darkness out 
of the prison house (the grave)." The same general 
sentiment is found in Isa. 49 : 8, " In an acceptable time 
have I heard thee.... and I will preserve thee, and give 
thee for a covenant of the people, to estabhsh the earth, 
to cause the desolate heritages to be inherited ; that thou 
may est say to the prisoners, (those who are in graves,) 
go forth ; to them that are in darkness, show yourselves." 
Ps. 142 : 7, " Bring my soul out of prison (the grave) 
that I may praise thy name." Isa. 61 : 1, " The Spirit 
of the Lord God is upon me ; because the Lord hath 
anointed me to preach good tidings to the meek ; he 
hath sent me to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim 
liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison 
(the grave) to them that are bound (therein) ; to proclaim 
the acceptable year of the Lord, cmd the day of ven- 
geance of our God." Luke 4 : 18. Ps. 69, " For the 
Lord heareth the poor and despiseth not his prisoners." 
Speaking of high ones and kings, God says in Isa. 24: 
22, " And they shall be gathered together as prisoners 
are gathered in the pit:" may refer to their being 
collected in the valleys of Jeshoshaphat prior to their 
destruction in Gehenna : or, being brought down to 
death, be " visited" with a resurrection ; and then " the 
Lord of armies, shall reign in Mount Zion." 




The most important words in this connection are the 
Hebrew word sheol^ and its Greek counterpart hacle^. 
We intend to demonstrate that neither of these words 
ever mean a definite place, much less a place where per- 
sons are tormented. Professor Stuart says sheol has been 
derived from shoal^ to ask^ crave^ demand^ require^ seek 
for^ etc ; it is equal to the Latin, orcus rapax — insatiable 
sepulchre, the grave. We give a few instances that bear 
out this meaning. 

Prov. 27 : 20, " Sheol ^ and destruction are never 
(sovaia) satisfied ; so the eyes of man are never {sovaia) 
satisfied." Sheol tr, hell. Prov. 30 : 15, " The horse 
leech hath two daughters, crying, Give, give. There are 
three things that are never satisfied, yea, four things say 
not. It is enough: Sheol; and the barren womb; the 
earth that is not filled with water ; and the fire that saith 
not. It is ENOUGH." Sheol is here tr. the grave. Isa. 5 : 
14, " Therefore sheol hath enlarged herself, and opened 
her mouth without measure : and their glory, and their 
multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall 
descend into it." Hab. 2 : 5, " Yea, also, because he 
transgresseth by wine, he is a proud man, neither keepetli 
at home, who enlargcth his desire as sheol, and is as 
death, and cannot be satisfied, but gathereth unto hiin 
ail nations, and heapeth unto him all people." These 
examples confirm the craving nature K^i sheol : and wliilo 
there are mortal persons upon the earth, the grave will 
be asking for them. The obvious sense of sheol^ is the 


grave in a general sense; that is, the state of death. 
The dominion of the dead, into which the righteous and 
the wicked ahke are cast, and in which they both alike 
repose. It is not a specific place^ but a state. Some 
only are in any kind of grave ; but all are in sheol^ the 
state of death. Sheol never occurs in the plural ; so if 
in going down into a specified place, or grave, one person 
is said to go into sheol ; and in going down into another 
specified place^ or grave, another person is said to be in 
sheol ; as there is but 07ie sheol^ and these two persons 
are in different places ; therefore sheol cannot be a place, 
but must be a state : they are both in sheol^ and both are 
in the state of death. 

In the German Bible, sheol is translated holle^ which 
seems to be very much like our old Saxon word helle^ or 
hell — the definition of which see in another place — in all 
places excepting Gen. 37 : 35, where it is translated ^ die 
gruhe^ grave ^ tomb^ or sepulchre ; and in Gen. 42 : 38, 
* die grube^ ; 2 Sam. 22 : 6, ' schmerzen des todes^ pains 
of death. But observe, Luther has frequently rendered 
the Hebrew word bour^ a pit, by the Gennan word 
holle: as in Ps. 28 : 1 ; 88 : 4; Prov. 28 : 17; Isa. 14: 
19; and Ezek. 31: 14. But then, Luther did not be- 
lieve in the immortality of the soul, nor in its separate 
conscious existence, nor in everlasting torments, and 
therefore did not perceive a^y great difference of mean- 
ing between the grave, and hell, and the pit. In his 
Defence, Prop. 27th, published 1520, he classes the * im- 
7aortality of the souV " with all those monstrous opinions 
to be found in the Roman dunjjhill of decretals." If he 
had entertained any idea that any of his degenerate suc- 
cessors would have given to his word holle., any other 
meaning than what is implied in a state of death, that 
word w^ould not have found a place in his version. 
Holle (we believe) means a place covered, or concealed. 

The learned Tremellius, who was a Jew by birth, and 
professor of Hebrew at Sedan, where he died in 1 580, 
translated the Syriac Version of the Bible, the oldest 
version extant, into Latin. He uniformly rendered the 
Syriac synonym for sheol into Latin, by sepulchrum^ i, 
o, u^ (the different endings showing only the different 
grammatical construction,) which means the sepulchre, 
grave, or tomb, excepting in one single instance, Ps. 49 : 


14, last clause, where he has rendered it, infernus^ hell^ 
because he thought that the wicked could not be con- 
signed to the same place as that from which the soul of 
the Psalmist was redeemed. Yet he acknowledges that 
sheol^ in most places, meant the general receptacle of the 

In the French Version, the word sheol is usually trans- 
lated sepulchre, and only once enfer^ hell^ in Job 11:8, 
where it has no relation to the dead, but is contrasted 
with the height of heaven. 

In the Greek Septuagint, the version in use in our 
Savior's time, sheol is rendered hades^ the unseen^ sixty 
times out of sixty-three; twice by thanatos^ death^ viz., 
in 2 Sam. 22 : 6, and Pro v. 23 : 14 ; and once by buthros^ 
pit,\n Ez. 32: 19, 21. 

As the Apocrypha is not found in Hebrew but only 
in Greek, and as the Septuagint has usually made hades 
the symbol of sheol, we give those places where hades is 
found, as probably showing where sheol was in the He- 
brew original. The word occurs twenty times, and is 
translated hell eight times, viz., 2 Esd. 2 : 29 ; 4:8; 8 : 
53 ; Tob. 13:2; Wisd. 17:14; Eccl. 21 : 10 ; 51 : 5, 6 ; 
and grave twelve times, viz., 2 Esd. 4:41; Tob. 3 : 10 ; 
Est. 13:7; Eccl. 14 : 12, 16 ; 17 : 27 ; 28 : 18, 21 ; 41 : 
4; Bar. 3:11; Dan. 3 : 66 ; 2 Mac. 6 : 23. 

Sheol occurs sixty-four times in the 0. T. ; three times 
it is translated pit / thirty times grave ; and thirty-one 
times hell. It would be passing strange, if the same 
word meant a particular place, where a single soul cor- 
rupted in unconscious silence, and also a receptacle where 
all the wicked souls or persons were congregated and 
tormented, and at the same time, a place where all the 
righteous dead were congregated in conscious enjoyment. 
Originally, the word seems to have meant the grave ; but 
as all dead men are not in graves, it came to mean the 
state of death in general. The burned men and the 
buried men are equally in sheol, whether they be right- 
eous or whether they be wicked. 

Sheol is translated j9^^, Job 17 : 16 ; Num. 16 : 30 and 
33v. See article Pit. 

Sheol is translated grave, Gen. 37 : 35 ; 42 : 38 ; 44 
29, 31 ; 1 Sam. 2:6; 1 Kings 2 : 6, 9 ; Job 7 : 9 ; 14 
13; 17:13; 21:13; 24 : 19 ; Ps. 6 : 5 ; 30: 3; 31: 17 


49 : 14, 15 ; 88 : 3 ; 89 : 48 ; 141 : 7 ; Prov. 1 : 12 ; 30 : 
16 ; Ecc. 9:10; Cant. 8:6; Isa. 14:11; 38 : 10, 18 ; 
Ezk. 31 : 15 ; Hos. 13 : 14, twice. 

Sheol is translated hell, prcyperly^ as a general thing, 
IF intended tc^ mean the same as the old Saxon word heil^ 
the covered receptacle of all the dead, where the good 
and the bad repose together in a state of unconscious- 
ness, or as defined under the Saxon word hell^ on an- 
other page ; but very imjirojierly^ and very shamefully, 
IF intended to be a symbol of the ' orthodox' and tradi- 
tionary hell, as a place of conscious torment for the wicked 
only. But w^e, without the sHghtest reservation, con- 
demn the translators ; for they have evidently endeavor- 
ed to obscure the true sense of the word sheol^ and to 
uphold the traditionary meaning of hell at the expense 
of truth and uniformity. Had sheol been uniformly 
translated pit^ or grave^ or hell^ or the state of the deady 
or even the mansions of the dead^ no such absurd idea, 
as that of a place of conscious torment, could ever have 
been associated with it. 

Sheol is translated hell in the following places, viz. 
Deut. 32 : 22 ; 2 Sam. 22 : 6 ; Job 1 1 : 8 ; 26 : 6 ; Ps 
9: 17; 16: 10; 18: 5; 55: 15; 86: 13; 116: 3; 139 
8 ; Pro. 5:5; 7 : 27 ; 9:18; 15 : 1 1, 24 ; 23 : 14 ; 27 
20 ; Isa. 5:14; 14 : 9, 15 ; 28 : 15, 18 ; 57 : 9 ; Eze. 31 
16, 17 ; 32 : 21, 27 ; Am. 9:2; Jonah 2:2; Hab. 2 : 5. 

Sheol is the only word that is translated hell in the 
0. T., and as we shall see, it ahvays means the state of 
death, the grave, and corruption ; and never can mean a 
place of conscious torment. The learned George Camp- 
bell observes, that the word sheol in the 0. T. means no 
more than kever^ the grave^ or sepulchre, excepting that 
it has a more general sense. Kever^ we have seen, is 
never translated hell. 

To show more conspicuously the glaring absurdity of 
considering the Hebrew sheol ^ as a burning hell for the 
torment of the wdcked, w^e adduce sheol as being the 
name of the first king of Israel. In later times this name 
has been differently pointed, thereby making a little dif 
ference in the sound of the letters, without altering in 
the least degree their meaning, and is written Saul. See 
the meaning of Saul in Cruden's Concordance, p. 716. 
This caps the climax. It will be recollected that the 


chief apostle of the Gentiles, being a Hebrew of the 
Hebrews, was named Saul. But how would it shock a 
Christian congregation to hear a child, at baptism, 
named Hell! Yet when Hebrew children were brought 
before the Lord, at circumcision, many of their names 
were called Sheol^ or Saul ! And as the Hebrews con- 
sidered this an appropriate name in the days of the apos- 
tles, it is impossible to believe that they ever associated 
with it the idea of the comparatively modern invented 
and * orthodox' hell 1! 

Where the word hell is found in the common version, 
grave is often found in the margin, and the reverse ; 
showing that the translators regarded either of these two 
words as a suitable representative for the word sheol ; 
yet have they availed themselves of every opportunity to 
insert the word hell^ where it would favor the popular 
tradition. We give a few instances where the margin 
and the text differ. Ps. 55 : 15, *' Let death seize upon 
them, and let them go down quickly into (sheol) hell?"^ 
Margin^ the grave. The meaning of both clauses is 
similar : Let them die. That his enemies should be hor- 
ribly tormented for ever, was a more suitable desire for 
Moloch than for David. Ps. 86: 13, "Thou hast de- 
livered my soul from the lowest {sheol) hell, "^"^ Margin, 
grave. Assemblies of violent men had sought after the 
soul of David, the life and being of David ; but God had 
delivered his soul, himself, from the * lowest sheol^ from 
the most terrible and cruel death. Jonah 2:2," Out of 
the belly of (sheol) hell cried I, and thou heardest my 
voice.*' Margin, grave. Sheol here, a figure of death. 
Isa. 14:9, " (Sheol) hell from beneath is moved for thee 
to meet thee at thy coming." Margin, ^rat'e. 11 v, 
" Thy pomp is brought down to the (sheol) graveJ^ 15 
V, " Yet thou shalt be brought down to (sheol) hell, to 
the sides of the (hour) pit,'*'' 18 v, " All the kings of the 
nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his 
own house," (or separate sepulchre). 19 v, " But thou 
art cast out of thy (kever) grave^ like an abominable 
branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust 
through with the sword, that go down to the stones of 
the (hour) pit ; as a carcass trodden under feet. Thou 
shalt not be joined with them in (kevooroh^ alhed to kever) 
burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain 


thy people : the seed of evil doers shall never be renown- 
ed." If * going into sheoV and * going into the grave' are 
identical and synonymous expressions in verses 1 1 and 
15, and are made to agree with house or sepulchre^ and 
kever^ and hour Wi^ grave ^ and pit^ v. 18 and 19; then 
certainly sheol in v. 11 means the same, and all imply a 
state of death. And going into sheol^ and going into a 
grave cut out of the sides of the pit, equally expresses 
only a state of death. Mark particularly the reading of 
V. 11, "Thy pomp is brought down to ^^eo/, and the 
noise of thy viols : the worm is spread under thee, and 
the worms cover thee." But this sheol was in ' the sides 
of the pit.' In Ezek. 32 : 23, kever^ the grave, is like- 
wise in the ' sides of the pit' Whose (kevoreem^ plural 
oikever^ graves.^ are set in the sides of the (hour) pit." 
From this we likewise prove, that kever^ the grave^ and 
pit^ and prison^ all imply the same thing, and that sheol^ 
hell^ if you please, implies no more, only as being a more 
general expression. 

In nearly all the thirty-three places where sheol is ren- 
dered grave and pit^ it would be extremely absurd to 
call sheol hell. Nevertheless we will call sheol hell — the 
very orthodox ' hell where the wicked are tormented for 
ever' — seeing ye will have it so, just for a little while, 
only that you may the better perceive its absurdity. 
Gen. 37 : 35, Jacob said, " For I will go down into {sheol) 
hell, unto my son mourning." Jacob supposed that Jo- 
seph was torn to pieces, yet in sheol. Did Jacob believe 
that his son Joseph was in hell^ and that he would soon 
follow ? Remember we are justified in calling sheol hell 
here, if the translators are in thirty-one other places. 
Gen. 42 : 28, Jacob again said, "Then shall ye bring 
down my grey hairs with sorrow to (sheol) hell?'' The 
same words occur in Ch. 44 : 29, 31. Did the sons of 
Jacob think that they would bring down their father 
with his grey hairs to hell to meet there his son Joseph ? 
1 Kings 2 : 6, 9, " Let not his hoar head go down to 
i^sheol) hell in peace.. ..But his hoar head bring thou down 
to (sheol) hell with blood." David gave these directions 
to Solomon concerning Joab and Shemei ; Did David 
believe that the hoar heads of these two would go in 
"jt?eacc" into a hell of torments^ if not slain by violence ? 
He says not a word where their " immortal ghosts" 


were to go, Ps. 88 : 3. The Psalmist said, " My soul is 
full of troubles; and my life draweth mgh unto (skeol) 
hell.''' Ps. 89 : 48, " What man is he that liveth and 
shall not see death ? Shall he deliver his soul from the 
hand of (sheol) hell ^" If you will insist that sheol means 
hell, then no man can save his soul from helL Ecc, 9 : 
10, " Whatsoever thy hand lindeth to do, do it with thy 
might ; for there is no w^ork, nor device, nor knowledge, 
nor wisdom, in heU,, [sheol,) whither thou goest." If 
sheol means hell, then all go to hell ; but there is no 
knowledge there, so the damned " know not anything ;'' 
and, of course, know no suffering ; and so the hell of the 
Bible, is not the theological hell. Isa. 38: 10, " I shall 
go to the gates of (be under the power of) hell, {sheol). 
1 am deprived of the residue of my years." Well might 
the pious Plezekiah have prayed that he might not die, 
if he had thought that he would go to a hell of torments ; 
but no, he thought it would terminate his years, his exis- 
tence, till the resurrection. Ps. 30 : 3, " O Lord, thou 
hast brought up my soul from hell, {sheol) y Hosea 13 : 
14, "I will ransom them from the power of hell, {sheol) ; 
I will redeem them from death : O death, I will be thy 
plagues ; hell, {sheol,) I will be thy destruction." But 
if God destroys hell, the damned must either escape or 
be destroyed with it. But then. How can the endless 
misery doctrine be established ? Ps. 49 : 12, ** Neverthe- 
less man being in honor abideth not : he is hke the beasts 
that perish. 14 v, Like sheep they are laid in hell, {sheol): 
death shall feed on them ; and the upright shall have do- 
minion over them in the morning (of the resurrection ;) 
and their beauty shall consume in hell, {sheol,) from their 
dwelling. But God will redeem my soul from the power 
oi hell, {sheol) : for he shall receive me." The Psalmist, 
and the wicked, and sheep, go together to hell {sheol) : 
but God will ultimately redeem the Psalmist therefrom. 
But what have sheep done that they, poor things, should 
be tormented for ever ? But suppose sheol should mean 
the state of death, of unconsciousness and corruption, 
then how natural and easy to comprehend the meaning 
of all these quotations. Ps. 6:4," Eeturn, O Lord, de- 
liver my soul : Oh save me for thy mercies' sake. For 
in death, there is no remembrance of thee : in hell, 
{sheol,) who shall give thee thanks ?" Here death and 


sheol are made interchangable and synonymous, and con- 
stitute a state in which there is no memory nor giving of 
thanks. Now, if sheol means hdl in thirty*one other 
places, then sheol means hell here, for it cannot bear the 
opposite meaning of a place of conscious torment for the 
wicked ; a place of conscious enjoyment for the righteous ; 
and likewise an opposite meaning of a place, the grave, 
where the dead, corrupt in unconscious silence ! ! Who 
will believe such absurdities ? As the translators, biased 
by their pagan traditions, believed in the immortahty, 
and in the separate conscious existence of the soul, so 
they must necessarily provide a place for their reception : 
hence the fables that the wicked dead are now torment- 
ed in hell, and the righteous dead are now in a state of 
gloritication in heaven, or paradise, or somewhere else* 
It is a pity that they could not find a more accommoda- 
ting word that could be more effectually twisted into 
accordance with their traditions, than this same w^ord 
sheol a 

Calsio's Concordance places sheol in Isa. 7 : 11. It 
may have read so in some copies. The common copies 
do indeed contain the same w^ord as to the arrangement 
of the letters, but it is now made to read differently so 
as to mean a request^ a petition^ by a little difference in 
the jjointing of the letters, ^' Ask thee a sign of the 
Lord thy God ; ask it either in the depth, or in the 
heio^ht above." There is very little difference in the 
original in the meaning of a request, a Jiell, a.nd a. petition ; 
and sheol only asks for the mortal living that they may 

Is it surprising, that in a volume abounding with in- 
stances of the most sublime and boldest poetry, where 
the floods and the mountains, and the hills and the val- 
leys, are made to '• clap their Jiands and shout for joy ;' 
W'here trees and birds converse ; where the blood oi 
Christ ' speaks,' and the blood of Abel finds a * voice,' 
and ^ calls for vengeance' from the ground, that had open- 
ed * her moutK to receive it ; where inanimate nature is 
endowed with life and motion ; is it surprising, we say, 
that sheol and its unconscious inhabitants, should occa- 
sionally be endowed with life and animation ? and that 
sometimes sheol should be represented as a large man- 
sion ? and so indeed we find it. These fine touches of 


po^t^j find a parallel in the parable of the Eich Man and 
Lazarus, in which the Ri<;h Man lifts up his eyes and 
<jonverses in hades. We give illustrations : 

Isa. 5 : 1 1, ^•' Wo unto Chem that rise up early in the 
JBorning, that they may follow strong ddnk....that regard 
3iot the wo^k of the lyord.,,. Therefore my people are 
.gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge :,., 
14 V, ^' Therefore sheal hath enlarged her (nephesh) soul, 
and opened her mouth without measure : and their glory 
:and their multitude, afid their pomp, and he that re- 
Joiceth, shall d-escend into it." Isa. 14 : 4, " Thou shalt 
take up this (moshol) parable against the king of Baby- 
lon, and say.- How liath the oppressor ceased, the golden 
<3ity ceased \ The Lord hath broken the staff o^ the 
wicked, and the sceptre of the rulers.... Yea, the fir-trees 
rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since 
thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us. 9 v, 
Sheol from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee ^t thy 
•coming: it «tirreth up tlie dead fo^r thee, even all the 
<chief ones^of the earth: it -hath raised up from their 
thrones all the kings of the nations. All they shall speak 
:and say unto thee, Art thou become w^eak as we ? Art 
thou become like unto us ? Thy pomp is brought down 
to sheol^ and the noise of thy viols z the loonti is spread 
under thee^ and the worms coven' thee.,^!YhoVi hast said in 
thy heart, I will ascend into heaven ;..,.! 4 v, I will ascend 
^bove the heights of clouds ; I will be like the Most 
High, 15 V, Yet thou shalt be brought down to sheol^ 
to the sides of the (hour) pit." Isa. 28 : 15, " Because ye 
have said, we have made a covenant with deathj and with 
^sheolwoQ we at agreement ; whea the ©verflowing scourge 
shall pass through, it shall not come unto us : for we have 
fnade lies out refuge : — the hail shall sweep away the 
^refuge of lies ;...,18 v, And your covenant with death 
«hall be disannulled, and your agreement with sheol shall 
^not stand -^ when the overflowing scourge .shall pass 
through, then ye shall be trodden down by it." Here 
•are two parallelisms in which death and sheol are made 
equal to each other. To deprive a person of his life, and 
Kjonsciousness ; and to send him to sheol ; mean exactly 
the same thing, 

Ezek. 3i : 2, " Son of Man, speak unto Pharaoh, king 
of Egypt, and to his multitude.... 10 v, Because thou hast 

194 BIBLE VS, TKAD-rriON^ 

lifted up thyself in h®ight..„ll v^ I have therefore de- 
livered him into the hand of the mighty one of the hea- 
then.... 12 V, And strangers, the terrible of the nations, 
have cut him oC..14 v,^ To the end that none of all the 
trees by the waters^ exalt themselves for their height.,., 
for they are all delivered unto deaths to the nether parts, 
of the earthy in the midst of the children of men, with 
them that go down to the pit [boiiry 15 v,. Thus saiuh 
the Lord God ; In the day when he went down to {sheol) 
to the state of deaths I caused a mourning :„..and I caused 
Lebanon to mourn for him^ and all the trees of the field 
fainted for him. 16 v, I made the nations to shake at 
the sound of his fall^ when I cast him dow^n to (sheol) 
hell^ with them that desceml into the (hour) pit : and all 
the trees of Eden... shall be comforted in the nether parts 
of the earth, 17 v^ They ako went down into [sheol) hell 
with him, unto them that be slain with the sword ; and 
they that were his arm, that dw^elt under his shadow in 
the midst of the heathen. 18 v, To whom art thou like 
in glory and in greatness among the trees of Eden ? 
Yet shalt thou be brought down w ith the trees of Eden 
unto the nether parts of the earth : thou shalt lie in the 
midst of the uncircumcised, w'ith them that be slain by 
the sword. This is Pharaoh and all his multitude, saith 
the Lord God." Here the associates of Pharaoh, under 
the figure, of lofty trees, are dehvered ' to death,' go 
down with him ^ i?ito sheoly ' into the pit,' and ' into the 
lower parts of the earth.' These expressions then all 
mean the grave, and a state of death. Now none of 
these phrases include the idea of ' torment^' for the as- 
sociates of Pharaoh are positively * comforted^ there !! 
(See 16 V.) " For the dead know not anything," and aU 
oppressions and sorrows cease, and " There the weary 
are at rest." In the 15 Yy sheol is rendered grave, and 
perhaps kever^ the grave, may be the true reading ; but 
this only makes the argument the stronger. For then, 
sheol, hell, the grave,, death, the pit^ and the nether or 
lower parts, aM equally express the state of death, the 
privation of life, and consciousness. Mark th^se multi- 
tudes are all in sheol, all in hell, all in the pit, all in the 
grave, and all in the nether parts of the earth ; but they 
are all in only one place- ; therefore all the terms imply 
the same thing, viz., a state of death. In the succeeding 


chapter this is made still stronger b}^ being contrasted 
with the land of the living no less than six times. To 
affirm that these multitudes are conscious, is pointedly to 
contradict the Spirit of God !! 

In Ezek. 32 : 21, 27, sheol occurs twice. The dead by 
a bold figure of speech, are represented as speaking to 
the king of Egypt, who was to be slain by the sword, 
" out of the midst of sheol.'''' "Of course," says Profes- 
sor Stuart, ^^gravej or the region of the dead, must be 
the meaning here." But we say, this being only a figure, 
like unto the rich nian speaking to Lazarus while in 
hades, sheol means here, the state of death, as in other 
places. In the 27 v, the multitudes of Meshech, have 
" gone to sheol with weapons of war ; and they have laid 
their swords under their heads?'^ Here is such a plain 
allusion to the common custom of burying warriors along 
with their weapons ; that we are compelled to believe 
that those who had gone to sheol, had gone to the grave, 
or a state of death, and are contrasted with the same 
sort of persons who, (23 v,) " caused terror in the land 
of the hving." They could not carry their weapons to 
the theological hell of torments ; neither are they in " the 
land of the living," as some would have us vainly be- 
lieve. There could be no comfort nor shouting in their 
hell ! ! From the 1 7 v, the word hour occurs six times, 
and is properly translated loit. Kever and kcvoreem^ 
grave and graves, occur six times ; the multitudes are 
there, and they are in the sides of the pit, they are in 
sheol, and they are in the nether parts of the earth, and 
they are not in " the land of the hving," a phrase which 
occurs no less than six times. The whole is very plain 
and terribly emphatic ; and we call the reader's attention 
to the whole passage, contained in Ezek. 32 : 17, to the 

In Isa. 14 c, The wicked Jews, under the figure of an 
unchaste female, are told, 9 v, " Thou wentest to the 
king with ointment, and didst increase thy perfumes, and 
didst send thy messengers far oiF, and didst debase thy- 
self even unto sheoiy This may mean, Thou didst pros- 
trate thyself very low, or. Thou didst make thyself 
loathsome as death. 1 Sam. 2:6," The Lord killeth and 
maketh aUve ; he bringeth down to sheol, and bringeth 
up." To bring down to sheol is to kill ; to bring up 


from sheol^ is to restore to life. So the parallelism, and 
contrast compels us to understand it. It is an hyperbole. 
Thou almost killest, and then restorest again to health; 
seems to be the idea conveyed. 2 Sam. 22 : 5, '' When 
the waves of death compassed me, the floods of ungodly 
men made me afraid ; the sorrows of sheol compassed 
me about ; the snares of death went before me ; in my 
distress I called upon the Lord.. ..and he heard my voice." 
Here again, when David was deUvered from death, he 
was delivered from hell, {sheol). This is repeated, Ps. 
18:5. We copy from Fry's translation a part of the 7th 
c. of Job ; italicising to arrest attention. 

7, " Remember that my life is a breath of air, 
It cannot return to see good. 

8, The eye that saw me cannot more behold me ; 
Thine eyes are on me, and I am not. 

9, Consumed is the cloud that hath passed ; 
So descending to sheol he rises not again : 

10, He returneth not again to his house, 
His place shall know him no more. 

15, Ay, thou dost try to sutibcation my breath. 
My bones to dissolution. 

16, / am wasting — / cannot lice for ever ! 
Desist from me, for my days are a vapor, 

17 What is a poor mortal^ that thou shouldst make him of 

And that thou shouldst fix thy attention on him. 
21, Since now /am about to lie down in the dust^ 

And thou wilt seek me, but I am no more J 

As the cloud is entirely dispersed and does not exist 
as a cloud ; so is he that descends to sheol ; so he that 
descends to sheol does not exist as a man or a Hving be- 
ing of any kind ; for if there were any essential living 
part left, the dissolved cloud would not be a fitting 
simile. And this is Job's express declaration, that the 
man Job, the essential '* /" should not exist; and even 
God could not find him, as a living being, if he should 
seek for him. 

Job 14: 

13, ** Oh ! that thou wouldest hide me in sJieol I 

That thou wouldst conceal me till thy wrath be passed." 


Sheol is here represented as a hidden or concealed 
place, where Job might be concealed even from God till 
his wrath be passed and Job raised to Hfe again. Sheol 
corresponds here to the Saxon helle or hell^ and to the 
Greek hades. 

Job 17: 

13, •' When T would hope, sheol is my home ; 
In darkness I spread my bed. 

14, I say to corruption, Thou art my father ! 
My mother ! and my sister ! to the worm. 

15, Ah ! where is that which I long for ? 

Ay, that which I long for — who can see it? 

16, Into the depth o( sheol will my hope descend, 
When we are together, below in the dust." 

This passage is very exphcit ; in going to sheol, hell, 
the state of death, he would be with darkness, corruption, 
and worms ; yet he ardently longed for it and earnestly 
sought it, surely not as a place of conscious torment, but 
as a refuge from torment, a resting in unconsciousness 
till the wrath of God be passed, and he be raised again 
in a nature not susceptible of pain. 

Job 24: 
19, *' As drought and heat consume the snow waters ; 
So do the wicked glide into sheol;.... 
And the worm shall feed sweetly upon them." 

The Septuagint reads this differently : viz., " Eetribu- 
tion shall be made to the sinner for what he hath done." 
If the first version be correct, then is the sinner destroy- 
ed by going down into sheol ; that is, he no more exists 
than snow waters exist when dried up by heat. Vapor 
they may be, but they are not snow waters ; so the sin- 
ner may be dust, but the sinner does not exist. 

Job 26 : 6, " Sheol is naked before him, and destruction 
hath no covering." Here again sheol and destruction 
are made synonomous. Ps. 55 : 15, '* Let death seize 
upon them, and let them go down quickly into sheol.^^ 
The same meaning and parallel as the last. Ps. 86 : 13, 
" Thou hast delivered my (nephesh) soul from the lowest 
sheol.^^ His enemies had sought his soul, that is, him- 
self, to destroy his being ; but God had dehvered hira 


from the most terrible and cruel death ; this is probably 
what is meant by the lowest skeol. Ps. 88 : 3, "For my 
soul is full of trouble : and my life draweth nigh unto 
sheol, I am counted with them that go down into the 
pit." David fully expected to go to sheol at death, but 
in V. 5, he declares he would be " Free among the dead 
[from all his troubles;] like those that are pierced through 
that lie in the [kever^) grave, whom God remembers no 
more^ they are cut off from his hand." In the 14 v, he 
says, " Lord, why casteth thou off my soul ? 16 v, Thy 
fierce wrath goeth over me ; thy terrors have (tsomath) 
annihilated me:" i. c, will do it. 

Ps. 141:7," Our bones are scattered at the mouth of 
sheoiy Here the grave is called the mouth or entrance 
to the state of death. Pro v. 1 : 10, " My son, if sinners 
entice thee, consent thou not. If they say, Come w^ith 
us, let us lay wait for blood ; let us lurk privily for the 
innocent without cause. 12 v. Let us sw^allow them up 
alive as sheol ; and whole, as those that go down into thje 
{hour) pit." This does not well accord with the current 
theology, which teaches, that the soul or spirit — some- 
times they say one, and sometimes the other, for error 
is not apt to be very definite — ^is separated from the man, 
or at least from his body ; but these sinners would swal- 
low them WHOLE, as sheol does^ and deposit them in a 
pit, or hole, or grave. The same theology teaches too 
that the innocent do not go to hell, as is here specified ; 
but to heaven at death. 

Prov. 7 : 6, *' I beheld among the simple ones... .a young 
man void of understanding.. ..And behold, there met him 
a woman with the attire of a harlot, and subtile of heart. 
22 V, He goeth after her straitway, as an ox goeth to the 
slaughter^ or as a fool to the correction of the stocks ; 
till a dart strike through his liver ; as a bird that hasteth 
to the snare, and knoweth not that it is for his /i/(2....She 
hath cast down many w^ounded : yea, many strong men 
have been slain by her. 27 v, Her house is the way to 
sheol^ going down to the chambers of deaths Here 
again, the cliimbers of death and hell mean the same. 
Prov. 15:11, ^^ Sheol and destruction are before the Lord." 
Destruction and hell are equal. 24 v, " The way of life 
is above to the wise, that he may depart from sheol be- 
neath." Bheol, hell, and death, are contrasted with life, 


Mi6. cottsciousftess. Songs 8 : 6., " Love is strong as 
death ; jealoiisy is cruel as sAco^," death. 

We shall quote four passages where sheol is used with- 
out any apparent r-eference to death. DeuL 32 : 22, 
** For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and it shall burn 
wnto the lowest sheol, and shaR consume the earth with 
fcer inci^ase, and set on fire the fiDundations of the moun- 
tains. '' The French translalioii reads^ " Evea to the bot- 
tonn of the lowest places." 

Job 11: 

7, " Canst thou in searcliing discover God 7 

Canst thou find even the perfections of the Almighty? 
*8, Lo ! the heights of the heavens, what canst thou achieve ? 

It is deeper than sheol ! what canst thou discern ? 
^, Longer th&n the earth is its measure, 

And wjder tiian tbe^eaf* 

Ps. 139: 7, " Wiiither shall I go from tliy {ruah) 
epirit? or whither shaU I fiee from thy presence ? If I 
ascend into heaven, thou art there : if I make my bed in 
sheol., behdd, tboa art there." Tiiis ppobably refers to 
the all-pervading intelligence of God; though some 
would appl}?^ it to vthe all-pervading principle of the spirit 
or principle of life. Amos 9:2," Though they dig into 
sheol^ thence shall my hand take them ; though they 
climb up to heavaa, thence will I bring them down." A 
strong figure, intimating the impossibility of evadiag the 
justice of God. Sheol may mean here an ^ibyss, a deep 
grave, or even a state of death as in other places. But 
mark, God ndinxtQi further infiict pain upon them whils 
in a state of death ; to do that his " hand must take 
them" from thence, must restore them to fife again, for 
4ead men cannot feci 

Does ti>e impatient reader begin to ask for those pas- 
sages where skeol really designates a place of torment for 
the damned souls or spirits of the wicked ? We cannot 
{find any, gentle reader, in the Bible, and we refer you to 
^^ectarian creeds ; but we will give you Professor Stuart's 
<ionfession taken from pag^ 114 of his " Exegetical Es- 
says." " The. sum of, the evidence from the Old Testa- 
ment in regard to sheol^ is, that the Hebrews did probably 
in some cases., connect ivith the use of this ivord, the idea 
<cf misery subsequent to the death of the body. It seems 

20Q BTBLR TS. TRA'omorf, 

ta me tliat we can safely believe thia ; aad to aver more 
than this wouM be somewhat hazardous, when all the 
examples of the word are duly considered."" He points 
out five passages, that he thinks may possibly designate* 
a place of misery, where (we suppose he means) the 
wicked are in conscious sufferings viz. ^ Job 21 : 13 ; Ps. 
9 : 17, 18 ; Prov. 5:5; 9 : 18 ;. 23 : 14. He also fancies= 
that Mat. 10: 28,. and Luke 12: 5;. teach a hell of con- 
scious torment ^ I 

If we understand the ProfessoFyhis argument is some- 
thing like this. The word sheol occurs- siixty-four or 
sixty-six times ; in fifty- three of these places, it certai?ili^ 
does not mean a hell of conscious torment ;. but there are places, — that is, one oat of thirteeUy — that, in conse- 
qneBce of the use of figurative languageyby a little ingenu- 
ity may he twisted so as to countenance this popular, semi- 
pagan theology,, of an existing hell where the wicked 
continue ahve in torment ! !. That is, this same word^ 
^\iQU p^'operly used^ always implies a state of death, but 
it may also, by a little twisting,, be made to designate its 
very opposite, a state of miserable life, and when applied 
to the righteous, a state of happy €07isciousness /// But 
it would be just as logical^ to take our last example^ 
Amos 9 : 2, and insist that the- wicked are happy in hea- 
ven, beca;use it says of them, " though they climb up ta 
heaven'^ I Hut we shall rightly estimate the value of 
Professor Stuart's opinion, in a case involving the truth 
of any of his favorite dogmas, by his remarks on Isa. 38 : 
17, " Behold for peace I had great bitterr^ss: l>ut thou 
hast in love to my soul delivered it from {shokhath) de- 
struction : for thou hast cast all my sin» behind thy 
back. For sJteol cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate 
thee : they that go down into the {hour) pit eannot hope 
for thy truths The living,, the livings he shall praise 
thee, as I do this day." " He cannot mean^'' (says Pro- 
fessor Stuart, page 90, '- Exegetieal Essays^) "• that after 
death there is na ability to praise Gody Tua existence of 
the pomers omd capacities of the soul? I think not. It 
seems to me clearly, that this is not his design ; although 
not a few of the later critics hai^e affirmed it to be so^ 
Shall we represent the Hebrews, and a Hebrew monarch 
enlightened as Hezekiak was, as being more ignorant ia 
respect to futurity than the Egyptians ? The people of 


God who lived under the light of a revelation^ more ig- 
norant than those who were in the midst of Egyptian 
night ! Believe this who will, I must have stronger 
evidence of its correctness than I have yet found, in order 
to give it credit." 

The Professor regards the meaning of this, and the 
many kindred expressions, as implying that the dead can- 
not praise God among the living on the earth. Thus he 
assumes that the Egyptians, and Pagans, and his infallible 
self, are correct in their creeds^ touching the state of the 
dead in sheol ; and that Hezekiah, David, Job, Isaiah, Paul 
and Christ, and the concurrent testimony of the whole 
Scriptures, are wrong III Truly a very modest assump- 
tion ! But he flatly contradicts the Bible ! Let us ex 
amine the Professor's passages ; premising that he has 
been rather unfortunate in the selection of his writers ; 
for it is an established principle of sound criticism, ''That 
no intelligent and honest writer, ever contradicts him- 
self" His passages are selected from Job, David, and 
Solomon ; all of whom clearly and plainly affirm that 
sheol is a state of unconsciousness. 

Job 21 : 13, Speaking of the prosperity and pleasures 
of the wicked, says, — " They spend their days in 
wealth, and in a moment go down to sheol,'''* We do 
not perceive the slightest intimation here, that they live 
or are tormented in sheol. Nay, more, the 17, 22, 26, 30, 
32, and 33 v, are directly opposed to this construction. 

Job 21 : 

13, *' They wear away their days in pleasure, 
And quickly descend into sheoL 

17, How often does God extinguish the lamp of the wicked ? 
And bringeth their destruction upon them ? 

And distributeth snares in his wrath ? 

18, They become like stubble before the wind, 
Like the chaff that is driven away by the storm. 

22, What ! will God teach discernment to a nothing'^ 
Will he judge the worm-eaten body ? 

25, Another will die with an embittered spirit, 
So that he could not relish his food. 

26, Alike in the dust they lie doum, 
Alike the worm doth caver them. 

28, For you will say, " Where is the house of the noble? 
And where is the tent, the habitation of the wicked 1 


29, Surely you have not inquired of those that travel on the 

Nor have you acquainted yourselves with their proofs. 

30, That the wicked will be (Jchosakh) spared to a day of de- 

struction ; 

To a day of vengeance will he be carried along. 
32j He too, will be borne to the sepulchre, (A-erer,) 

And the watch will be set over the tumulus ; 
33, The sods of the valley will he sweet for him,^^ 

The wicked often descend quickly into sheol ; but 
mark the items of the context : God extinguisheth the 
[nair) lamp, the spirit, or life of the wicked. Prov. 20 : 
27, " The spirit of man is the (nair) candle of the Lord." 
24 : 20, " The {nair) candle of the wicked shall be put 
out." Job 18 : 6, " His {nair) candle shall be put out 
with him." Job and Solomon thus forcibly portray the 
extinction of all consciousness. The 22 v. teaches very 
expressively the unconsciousness of the dead, and per- 
haps this is the reason of the varieties of translation. 
The 26 V. declares that all fare alike in aheol^ being the 
unconscious food of worms. 30 v. The wicked will be 
destroyed^ and the 33 v. declares that so far from sheol 
being a place of torment, that the grave, where the wicked 
are, is positively sweety as a rest from pain. Eemember 
sheol is not a place^ but a state of death ; the righteous 
and the wicked are in it — in death — and in their graves. 
Please to refer to the other evidence we have produced 
from the intelligent^ honesty and consistent Job. 

Ps. 9 : 17, 13, " The wicked shall be turned into sheol^ 
and all the nations that forget God. For the needy shall 
not always be forgotten : the expectation of the poor 
shall not perish for ever." We confess that we draw a 
conclusion the very opposite from that of Professor 
Stuart. Though the hope of the poor may perish for a 
time, by his death,— ;-for " the righteous perish," — yet as 
they will be raised again, their hope will not perish for 
ever ; but the antithesis requires us to understand, that 
notwithstanding the wicked may be raised, or not raised, 
yet they will ultimately perish for ever ; and perishing 
for ever is the very opposite of living for ever. The ex- 
pression, " turned into sheol^'^ implies no more than 
death, extinction of being. What says the context? 
20 V, " Put them in feir, O Lord : that the nations may 


know themselves to be but (enoush) mortals." To live 
in continued torment, a man must be indestructible ; 
that is, be insusceptible of torments, which is a con- 
tradiction. The 5 V, declares, — *^ Thou hast destroy- 
ed the wicked, thou hast put out their name for ever 
and ever." If this does not mean, that they will be 
blotted out of existence — we think it does — ^yet the in- 
te/ligent, hofiesi and consistent Psalmist, clearly teaches 
elsewhere that thi« is their fate. Will the reader peruse 
carefully the 37th Psalm ? we quote a few verses. 9 v, 
"Evil doers shall be cut off." 10 v, " For yet a little while, 
and the wicked shall not be : yea, thou shalt diligently 
consider his place, and it shall not be." 20 v, " But the 
wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be 
as the fat of iambs : they shall consume ; into smoke shall 
they CONSUME uway?^ Ps. 83 : 9, " Do unto [thine ene- 
mies] as unto the Midianites who (sliomad) were anni- 
hilated at Endor : they became as dung for the earth." 

Prov. 5 : 3-5, " For the lips of a strange woman drop 

as a honey-comb but her end is bitter as wormwood.... 

5 V, Her feet go down to death ; her steps take hold on 
sheoiy We see no indication of torments in sheol here ; 
but here is a parallelism, and here the rule that is appli- 
cable to it ^' If one member of a parallelism be clearly 
understood, the other member is hkewise understood, as 
it must always correspond and can never contradict it" 
As one member signifies death, privation of life, uncon- 
eeiousness ; so must the other, 

Prov. 9 : 13-18, " A foolish woman is clamorous to 

call passengers.... Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither 
..,.18 V, But he knoweth not that the dead are there ; and 
that her guests are in the depths of sheol. ^^ If her guests 
are dead in sheol, we cannot see how any that are not 
hopelessly embued with the popular error of the immor- 
tality, and consequent separate existence of the soul, can 
possibly suppose that the dead are Hving in sheol. This 
would be putting bitter for sweet, and darkness for light, 
with a vengeance. But the language is figurative. — 
" Death and hell [hades — sheol] delivered up the dead 
(not the living) which were in them." Rev. 20 : 13. 

Prov. 23 : 14, "Thou shalt beat him (thy child) with a 
rod, and shalt deUver his soul from sheol?'* The mean- 
ing of this is obvious to all but a Professor, and a popu- 


lar theologian. As ^ his soul ' is only a Hebraism for 
himself, it simply means, That timely correction will save 
the child from everlasting death, from everlasting des- 
truction. The going of the righteous to sheoly does not 
preclude their resurrection to life with an incorruptible 
nature. Passages in N, T. will be examined in their 


We have a few more passages where the word sheol 
occurs that clearly define its nature, and need but little 
comment. Ps. 6 : 4-6, DavM prays to be deHvered from 
death. 4 v^ *' Eeturn, O Lord, dehver my soul : oh save 
me for thy mercies' sake. For in death thei'e is no re- 
memh'ance of thee : in sheol ^ wJw shall give thee tJianks ?'''* 
Ps. 30 : 2, 3, 9, "O Lord my God, I cried unto thee, and 
thou hast healed me. Lord, thou hast brought up my 
soulfrofu sheol : thou hast kept me alive,, that I should 
not go down to the (boiir) pit. What profit is there in 
my blood, when I go down to (sho/chath) destruction ? 
Shall the dust pi'aise thee i Shall it declare thy truth .^'' 
Ps. 31 : 17, "^Let the wicked be ashamed, and let them 
be silent in sheol^ Sheol is alike the state of the right- 
eous and the wicked. It is a state in w^hich there is 
silence, but no praise,^ no remembrance, no thanks, but 
the very soul is destroyed for a time. The same thing 
is emphatically taught in the 88th Psalm, though the 
word sheol does not occur there. See verses 3, 4, 5, 6» 
10, 11, 12 and 16; and Psa. 115: 17. Ps. 49: 14, 15^ 
" Like sheep they are laid in sheol ; death shall feed on 
them ; and the upright shall have dominion over them in 
the morning [of the resurrection] ; and their beauty shall 
consume in sheol from their dwelling. But God will re- 
deem my soul from the power of sheol : for he shall re- 
ceive me." As the wicked are laid in sheol like sheep, 
they must be as unconscious as are dead sheep. 

Isa. 38 : 10, '' I said in the cutting off of my days, I 
shall go to the gates of sheol : I am deprived of the resi- 
due of my years. I said, I shall not see the Lord, even 
the Lord in the land of the living. 17 v, Thou hast in 
love to my soul dehvered it from(shokhath) destruction: 
for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back. 18 v, 

PSALM 16: 10 EXAMINED. 205 

For sheol cannot praise thee^ death cannot celebrate thee : 
they that go down to the {hour) pit cannot hope for thy 
truth. 1'he hving, the living, he shall praise thee, as I 
do this day." Comment cannot make this stronger. 

Ecc. 9 : 5, " The living k7iow that they shall die : but 
the dead know not any things neither have they (present 
tense, at this time) any more a reward ; for the memory 
of them is forgotten. Also their love, and. their hatred ^ 
and their envy^ is noiv perished ; neither have they any 
more a portion {le-oulom) during this age in any thing 
that is done under {shejnesh) the light of the sun. 10 v, 
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might ; 
for there is no work^ nor device^ nor knowledge^ nor ivis- 
dom, in sheol, whither thou goest.^^ Reader, examine 
these passages carefully, and judge for yourself. Let no 
person say he believes the Bible, after he has read these 
passages — and we have quoted all the passages where 
sheol occurs, excepting Ps. 16 : 10 — if he shall still insist 
that there is knowledge, torment, or consciousness in 
sheol, or in hell, which words ahvays express a state of 
death and unconsciousness 


Ps. 16: 

10, " Thou wilt not leave my sbul in hell, (sheol) ; 

Neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption." 

We have reserved this important passage for the last, 
because inspiration teaches us, that it speaks of the re- 
surrection of Jesus Christ, which is the foundation stone 
of the gospel system. Take away this, and then all the 
righteous souls that have already entered sheol have 
entirely perished: 1 Cor. 15: 18. As all future exist- 
ence, for the dead, is made to depend upon a resurrec- 
tion, and as a resurrection from the dead always and 
necessarily implies a restoration again to life, it follows 
most conclusively that the dead in sheol are altogether 
deprived of every vestige of life, of consciousness, of be- 
ing, excepting in the purpose of God as to the future. — 
For it would be a manifest contradiction, to promise a 
restoration to Hfe, to those that are not, and never will 
be deprived of life. That refuge of lies — '' the conscious 


existence of the soul when separated from the body" — 
will not avail here, for the soul is principally spoken of, 
and interchangably with the body, or the person himself, 
as is likewise the case in several of the passages from 
the Psalms and Isaiah, but recently quoted. 

In referring this text to the resurrection of Christ, 
Peter tells us, (Acts 2 : 31,) " That his soul was not left 
in" sheol^ Greek " hades, and that his flesh did not see 
corruption, for this Jesus hath God raised up." And 
that David meant Christ and not himself, he states in the 
29th and 34th v. For the soul of David, or David himself, 
is still "dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us to 
this day," and consequently the soul of David did see 
corruption ; (Acts 13 : 36) " For David is not ascended 
into the heavens." 34 v. That the soul of Christ should 
die was made a matter of prophecy ; and that it did die 
is matter of sacred history. " His soul was made an 
offering for sin;" " His soul was poured out unto death." 
*' His soul was exceedingly sorrowful even unto death;" 
" He gave his soul {psuche) a ransom for many;" and 
^WQ times he declared that " He laid down his soul 
{psuche) for the sheep." So when his soul died it went 
down into sheol, " into the lower parts of the earth," or 
grave ; but God did not leave his soul in sheol ^ but 
raised it on the third day before it saw corruption. But 
to suppose that sheol or hades mean a hell where the 
wicked — or any part of them — are alive in torment, or 
that the soul of Christ was alive in any sense, contradicts 
the express declaration of the Spirit by Peter, and his 
definition of the resurrection. And more, it contradicts 
the theological dogma, '* That the souls of all the right- 
eous go to heaven at death ;" for David did not go there, 
and the soul of Christ did not go there. Some indeed 
absurdly tell us that the soul of Christ preached the gos- 
pel to living damned souls in hell. But this is a flagrant 
contradiction. The gospel is glad tidings of great joy, 
the ofler of hfe and pardon to those whose life is forfeited 
by transgression. But preachers tell us that the damned 
are immortal, and consequently cannot lose their lives ; 
that they must suffer endless misery, and consequently 
cannot be pardoned ! But does not the Spirit say, Ecc. 
9 : 10, That there is no work in sheol, no wisdom, nor 


device, nor knowledge ; how then could the good work 
of preaching be done in such a place ? 

As '' my soul," in our text, is only an Hebraism for 
me^ and as, in the cUmate of Judea, corruption was sup- 
posed to take place on the fourth day — see John 11: 39, 
" My Lord, by this time he is putrid ; for four days have 
elapsed" — the not being suflfered to see corruption, was 
equal to the promise of a resurrection by the third day. 
And the text and context, divested of their oriental and 
poetical costume, is equivalent to a promise ; and inspired 
the hope, " I rejoice in the anticipation of an early re- 
surrection, for thou wilt show me the path of Hfe." For 
it is clear that all the terms, * my heart,' * my tongue or 
glory,' ' my flesh,' * my soul,' ^ thy Holy One,' all consti- 
tute but one, indivisible, personal being. This one indi- 
vidual being, constituting the Messiah, died, entered into 
sheol, or the state of death ; but his Father quickly 
raised him to life again ; and therefore he can say, " I am 
he that liveth, and was dead ; and, behold, I am alive 
for evermore. Amen ; and have the keys of hades and of 
death;" Rev. 1 : 18. " And because I live ye (my ser- 
vants) shall live also:" John 14: 19. Therefore the 
future hfe of the Christian " is hid with Christ in God. 
And when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then 
shall we also appear with him in glory." 


As Peter in Acts 2 : 27, in translating Ps. 16 : 10, 
uses the Greek term hades^ as a representative of the 
Hebrew sheol ; and as the Septuagint translates sheol by 
hades, 60 times out of 63, we have authority for suppos- 
ing that hades has the same general meaning as sheol, 
viz. death ; a state of death ; the dominion of death ; and 
the grave, as a general receptacle of the dead. The 
word hades is derived from a, not, and idein, to see ; the 
unseen, the invisible, obscure, dark; and agrees nearly 
with the Saxon word, hell, as being invisible and hidden. 
The ancients often used the hades for a state of death. — 
" Hades pontias^^ — death by sea ; " hades phonios^^ — 
death by murder. 

Hades occurs in the N. T. eleven times, viz. Mat. 1 1 : 
23; 16: 18; Luke 10: 15: 16: 23: Acts 2: 27, 31; 


1 Cor. 15: 55; Eev. 1 : 18; 6 : 8 ; 20 : 13, 14. Hades 
is translated grave^ in 1 Cor. 15 : 55; but in every other 
place, Jiell. 

" As to the word liades^'' says Dr. Campbell on the 
Gospels, Diss. 6, *' in my judgment it ought never to he 
reiidered hell ; at least in the sense wherein that word 
is now universally understood by Christians. In the Old 
Testament, the corresponding w^ord is sheol^ w'hich signi- 
fies the state of the dead in general, without regard to 
the goodness or badness of the persons, their happiness 
or misery.. ..The state of the dead is always represented 
under those figures which suggest something dreadful, 
dark, and silent, about w^hich the most prying eye, and 
listening ear, can acquire no information. The term 
hades is well adapted to express the idea. To this^ the 
word HELL, in its primitive signification^ perfectly corres- 
ponded. For at first it denoted only what was secret 
OR concealed." 

Dr. Clarke says. Mat. 11: 23, of hades : " The word 
hell^ used in the common translation, conveys now an im- 
proper meaning of the original word ; because helli^ only 
used to signify the place of the damned. But the w^ord 
hell comes from the Anglo-Saxon, helan^ to cover." But 
yet absurdly enough, he says, Acts 2 : 27, " This hades 
was Tatarus to the wicked, and Elysium to the good." 
Thus acknowledging and endorsing the Pagan fable !!! 

Mat. 11 : 23, is parallel to Luke 10 : 15. "Thou, Ca- 
pernium, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be brought 
down to hades .*" Luke, " be thrust dow^n to hades^ — 
Hades seems to mean here humihation, as contrasted 
with present exaltation ; as death is opposed to life. The 
city w^as destroyed by the Komans soon after. The high 
privileges which it enjoyed and lightly esteemed, brought 
destruction upon it and its inhabitants. But as about 
forty years elapsed from the prophecy to the fulfillment, 
many who then inhabited it escaped the general ruin. 
The expression may hkewise refer to the everlasting de- 
struction, and death of those that rejected the teachings 
of Christ ; but as the reference is to a day of judgment 
it seems rather to refer to the general ruin that came up- 
on the city and its inhabitants. At all events, here is no 
allusion to torments after death. 

Acts 2 : 27, is but the Greek translation of Ps. 16 : 10, 


and we refer to our examination of that text for an ex- 
position of this. The Hebrew word nephesh is here re- 
presented by psuclie^ and sheol by hades. Parkhurst ac- 
knowledges that psuche in this place means the body or 
animal frame, 31 \\ '^ He, seeing this before, spake of 
the resurrection of Christ, that his soiol was not left in 
hades ^ neither his flesh did see corruption.'' Kitto con- 
fesses the same thing. From the Syriac, Dr. Murdock 
translates, " And he foresaw and spoke of the resurrec- 
tion of Messiah, that he was not left in the grave, neither 
did his body see corruption." ' His somP in Greek, is he 
in the Syriac. 

Mat. 16: 18, Campbell's translation. Christ speaking 
to Peter said, " I tell thee likewise. Thou art named 
Rock ; and on this rock I will build my church, over 
which the gates of Iiades shall not prevail." ^ The gates 
ofhadeSj^ may mean the power and dominion of hades ^ as 
the gates of cities were places where pei*sons collected 
for judicature. Gen 22: 17, "Thy seed shall possess 
the gate of his enemies." Christ shall possess the power 
and place of entrance into the cities and kingdoms of his 
enemies. As hades means death, or the state of death, 
so, * the gates of hades, means the power or dominion of 
death. Death may prevail over the members of the 
church of Christ, for a little season, but " when Christ, 
who is the Resurrection and the Life, shall appear, then 
will he raise all his true disciples to life, with an incor- 
ruptible nature, that will no more be subject to death. 
The most of the saints are now under the dominion of 
death ; death has obtained a temporary victory over 
them ; they sleep in a state of unconsciousness ; but they 
will be awakened by the voice of the {archaggelon) ruler 
of angels, and with the trumpet of God : and the dead 
in Christ shall rise first. meet the Lord in the air ; 
and so shall we ever be with the Lord." 1 Thess. 4:16; 
Col. 3 : 4. Peter was entrusted with the keys of the 
kingdom of heaven ; he opened the way to both Jews and 
Gentiles, by first proclaiming the forgiveness of sins and 
the resurrection of the dead, through a crucified, but now 
risen Savior. Acts 2 : 44; 10: 34; 15:7. And the 
church was built upon the foundation of the apostles, and 
prophets, (generally, and upon Peter particularly,) Jesus 
Christ himself being the chief corner stone. Ep. 2 : 20. 


But ^ the gates o^hades^ says Parkburst, ^ may be al- 
lusive to the form of the Jewish sepulchres, which were 
large caves with a narrow mouth or entrance, many of 
which are to be found in Judea.' The Septuagint trans- 
lates Isa. 38 : 10, ^ Gates of sheol^ by ^ gates of Jmdes? 
But we consider it a settled point of Bibhcal criticism 
that sheol and hades never mean the grave excepting in 
a general sense, as expressive of death. We consider 
the expression nearly allied to that in Ps. 107 : 18, " They 
draw near unto the gates of death." But whether death, 
or the grave — as implying death — be meant, the sense is 
not much altered ; for as He " brought again from the 
dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep,'' 
" so also those that sleep in Jesus will God bring with 
him" ; from the dead ; and either way the church will 
ultimately triumph over death — " hades will not prevail 
against it." 

Eev. 1 : 18, " I am he that liveth, and was dead ; and 
behold I am alive for evermore, Amen ; and have the 
keys oi hades and of death." 

Will the reader refer to our exposition of Ps. 16 : 10, 
Acts 2 : 27, 3 1 ; and to the whole of the article on " The 
Prison." In John 11 : 25, Jesus calls himself" The Re- 
surrection and the Life," and Petercharges upon the Jews 
Acts 3:15, that they " killed the Author of Life, whom 
God hath raised from the dead." That is, Christ will 
be the Author of the life of all those who will ultimately 
live for ever ; for Christ is the first who has been " born 
again" from the dead with an incorruptible nature. Heb. 
2:9," Jesus was made a httle lower than the angels for 
the suffering of death,....that he by the grace of God 
should taste death for every man,.... 14 v, that through 
death he might destroy him that had the power of death, 
that is, the devil ; and deliver them, who through fear of 
death were all their life time subject to bondage." Heb. 
9:15, Macknight — " And for this reason, he is the Me- 
diator of the new covenant, that his death being accom- 
plished for the redemption of the transgressions of the 
first covenant, the called may receive the promise of the 
eternal inheritance." 16 v, " For where there is a cove- 
nant, there is a necessity that the death of the appointed 
sacrifice be brought in." Therefore Christ has entered 
once into the holy places, 12 v, " By his own blood, 


having obtained for us an eternal redemption" from death 
and the grave, and the authority " to open the prison 
doors to those who are bound" therein, and who are now 
under the dominion of hades or death ; but " when Christ 
who is our Life shall appear," then will he use " the keys 
of hades and of death'''' to unlock the prison house and hbe- 
rate the prisoners therefrom. 

1 Cor. 15 : 54-57, '^-Now, when this corruptible shall 
have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put 
on immortality, then shall happen the thing which is 
written, (Isa. 25: 8,) * Death is swallowed up for ever.' 
Where, O death ! is thy sting ? Where, O hades I is 
thy victory ? Now thanks be to God who giveth us the 
victory, through our Lord Jesus Christ." The clauses 
of the b5 V, may have read differently in the sixth cen- 
tury. '* Where, O death ! is thy victory ? Where, Q 
death ! is thy sting ?" 

Isa. 25: 6, and several succeeding chapters is a pro 
phecy of the coming of the Lord and the establishment 
of his kingdom upon the earth at that period. Then will 
" death be swallowed up in victory," or * for ever.' Death 
reigns now, exercising his dominion over the saints, as he 
did over Christ himself, for " Christ being raised from 
the dead, dieth no more ; death hath no more dominion 
over him." Rom. 6 : 9, So death has obtained a partial 
victory over the saints and church of God ; but when 
Christ comes, and raises his saints to life, their corrupti- 
ble and mortal natures are invested with incorruptibility 
and immortality, for the first time. Then death, which 
had swallowed them up, and hades^ the dominion of 
death shall themselves be swallowed up, so far as the 
saints are concerned, for ever ; preparatory to their final 
destruction, when death, and hades ^ the dominion of 
death, shall no more exist. Death and hades^ are here 
personified, and invested w^ith a poetical living existence 
to show their power, and the termination of it over the 
church of God. In the 55 v, the apostle quotes from 
Hosea 13: 14, "I will ransom them from the power of 
sheol^ ( Gr. hades) ; I will redeem them from death : O 
death, I will be thy plagues ; O sheol (hades) j I will be 
thy destruction : repentance shall be hid from mine 
eyes." The Septuagint in this place reads nearly as the 


This passage establishes the following propositions : — 

1. That until the saints are raised from the dead, they 
are mortal and corruptible ; and so the dogma of natural 
immortality, or-the immortality of the soul, is demonstra- 
ted to be a fiction. 

2. That death has obtained a complete, though tem- 
porary victory over the saints of God, and consequently 
no principle of life and consciousness belong to the saints 
daring the dominion of death. 

3. That at the coming of Christ the saints are raised 
from a state of death, of unconsciousness, and are then 
invested with incorruptibility, an undecaying nature, and 
consequently with immortality ; principles unpossessed 
prior to that time. 

4. That as this victory over death is obtained '' through 
our Lord Jesus Christ^'' the wicked, who are not in 
Christ, must ultimately remain under the dominion of 
death ; they not being incorruptible, and not being im- 
mortal, must ultimately " perish in their own corrup- 

5. A period will arrive when " there will be no more 
death." Death and the dominion of death over all the 
righteous will cease to exert any power. 

And now we ask, Why have our translators departed 
from their usual practice in this passage, and rendered 
hades by the word grave instead of hell ? Did they per- 
ceive that as hades or hell^ is to be destroyed, that it 
would have endangered their favorite theory of eternal 
misery ? Or, did they see that as hades has dominion 
over the righteous for a time, and that they were re- 
deemed therefrom — brought back, by Christ himself go- 
ing into hades that he might abolish its power over the 
saints for ever — that hence hades could not mean a 
place of conscious and horrible torments, and had they 
rendered hades hell^ in this passage, their readers would 
have perceived the same thing ? We must say it looks 
very like intentional deception. 

Dr. Adam Clarke, at the end of 1 Cor. 15, after profes- 
sing an '* honest intention and an earnest desire to find 
out the truth," makes the following singular admission. 
*' One remark I cannot help making ; the doctrine of the 
resurrection appears to have been thought of much more 
consequence among the primitive Christians than it is 


now ! How is this ? The apostles were continually in- 
sisting on it, and exciting the followers of God to dili- 
gence, obedience, and cheerfulness through it. And 
their successors in the present day seldom mention it 1 
So apostles preached, and so primitive Christians be- 
lieved ; and so we preach, and so our hearers believe. 
There is not a doctrine in the Gospel on which more 
stress is laid ; and there is not a doctrine in the present 
system of preaching which is treated with more neglect." 
Truly, Doctor, the apostle based the whole of future 
life upon this one doctrine, ^^If there be no resurrection^ 
there is no future life ;''^ which proposition he distinctly 
states five times in this same chapter : besides, by con- 
trasting the present constitution of man with that nature 
he must possess to make him live forever, he demon- 
strates the absolute necessity of a resurrection, else the 
righteous have already perished. The Doctor was bhnd- 
ed by his creed ; for consistently therewith, there cannot 
possibly be any resurrection of the dead, as his never, 

* never-dying soul,' has never been subjected to the do- 
minion of death ; nay, is more ahve without the body 
than with it, and goes immediately from death to glory ; 
and therefore, what is the use and importance of a resur- 
rection ? particularly after he has altered the apostle's 
*' Eesurrection of the Dead^'' into the " Resurrection of 
the Body^'' merely! But was the Doctor ^honest' and 

* earnest' in his * desire to find out the truth ?' why then 
appeal from the oracles of God, to * vain philosophy and 
the traditions of men,' and direct his readers to ^''DreuPs 
Essays?'''' And why does he shamefully pervert the 
words of the living God, in his exposition of verse 45 : 
" And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a 
living soul;" the last Adam was made a quickening 
spirit ?" The Doctor remarks, " The apostle says this 
is written : The first man Adam was made a living soul : 
this is found. Gen. 2: 7, in the words nishmath chaiyim, 
the breath of lives ; which the apostle translates psuchen 
zosa72j a living souiy Now the Doctor must have 
known, that the apostle alluded to Gen. 2 : 7, " Vayehi 
ha- Adam le-nephesh chaiyh — The Adam was for, or be- 
came, a living soul;" for he quotes these words in the 
same connection. It is not necessary to suppose that the 
apostle asserts that the last clause was written, though 


the same in substance appears often. Can the Doctor 
be inexcusable here ? We say not. See his exposition of 
this very passage, and the distinction he makes between 
the nephesh and the nesme or nishmath. 

Eev. 20 : 13-15, " And the sea gave up the dead that 
were in it ; and death and hades delivered up the dead 
which were in them : and they were judged every man 
according to their ^vorks. And death and hades were 
cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And 
whosoever w'as not found written in the book of life was 
cast into the lake of fire." 

This solemn passage describes the end of the wicked 
and the end of Jiades or hell. They shall be entirely de- 
stroyed. As death and hades here are personifications, 
so we conceive the lake of fire sympolizes the entire de- 
struction of all that are cast into it. As hell itself is to 
be destroyed, it cannot at the same time be a place where 
the wicked will continue to be tormented. 

Eev. 6: 8, "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: 
and his name that sat on him w^as Death, and Ha- 
des followed with him. And power was given unto 
them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with the 
sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the 
beasts of the earth." This is a prophecy of some great 
destruction, in which many, by various agencies, will be 
swept into the dominion of hades or death. A place of 
perpetual torment is by no means recognized in this 

Luke 16 : 22, "The rich man also died and was buried; 
and in hades^ being in torments, he looked up, and saw 
Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom." 

In this parable, the Jewish priesthood, personated by 
the rich man, died, the priesthood being abolished ; and 
while in hades^ the dominion of death, he saw the pecu- 
liar privileges of the Abrahamic covenant in the poss- 
ession of the formerly despised Lazarus, w^ho personated 
the Gentiles. Will the reader please mark these points : 

1. The rich man died: "The dead know not any- 
thing." Ecc. 9: 5, 6; Ps. 146: 4. 

2. He was in hades^ equal to sheol^ " There is no work, 
nor device, nor knowledge^ nor wisdom, in sheol^ whither 
thou goest." Ecc. 9:10. If the rich man represented 
a single person, and that person dead and under the do- 


minion of death, he could not possibly be alive at the 
same time. 

3. As no inferential testimony can set aside positive 
and direct testimony, this must be received as a figure^ 
such as is of frequent occurrence, respecting this same 
dominion of death. In Ezek. 32: 21, the dead by a 
strong figure of speech, are represented as speaking "out 
</f the midst of sheol^'''' much in the same manner as the 
rich man is represented as speaking here. Pharaoh is 
said to be comforted in sheol^ when he sees his enemies 
like himself in one common destruction. But we refer 
our readers to the many instances we have selected in 
another part of this work. 

4. It would be very singular, if the word hades^ which 
occurs eleven times in the New Testament, sixty times 
in the Septuagint, twenty times in the Apocrypha, and 
its equivalent word sJieol^ sixty-four times in the Old Tes- 
tament ; in all, one hundred and ninety -nine times ; and 
in one hundred and ninety-eight places certainly implies 
a state of death : it would be strange indeed, if in our 
text, it should imply that hades is actually a place of life 
and torment ; and especially, when in the very same text 
it is said — of the person to whom the actions of life are 
attributed, "77/^ rich also died." The person who 
can insist on this must be most thoroughly imbued with 
the semi-pagan philosophy of the separate conscious ex- 
istence of the soul, and its immortality ; as no allusion 
is made to the soul as a separate thing, but to the rich 
man himself and Lazarus himself, acting in a figure, 
through the instrumentality of material organs, such as 
eyes, ears, fingers, and tongues, 


In the received Greek text, the word Gehenna occurs 
twelve times, and is translated hell in every place. It is 
not a Greek word — ^it does not occur in any classic au- 
thor ; it is merely the Grecian mode of spelling the He- 
brew words which are translated, * The Valley of Hin- 
nom.' Parkhurst considers that as the Septuagint 
translate, or rather spell in Greek letters, without trans- 
lating gee or gaij a valley, and Hinnom, a man's name, in 
Josh. 18 : 16, by Gaihenna^ so the Gehenna of the N. 


T. is in like manner a corruption of the same Hebrew 
W'ords, Gee^ a valley, and Hinnorn^ the person who was 
once the possessor of it. So we may consider the word 
as Hebrew with nothing of Greek about it, except the 
spelling. Our translators have no more authorit}'- for 
translating gelienna by hell^ than they would have had 
for translating Sodom or Gomorrha, hell. The word is 
seldom translated in the foreign versions. Stuart, Clarke, 
Schleusner, and all critics are agreed upon the origin of 
this w^ord. 

The valley of Hinnom was a delightful vale planted 
with trees, watered by fountains, on the south-east of Je» 
rusalem, by the torrent Kedron, Here the idolatrous 
kings of Judah placed the brazen image of Moloch, which 
had the face of a calf, but the rest resembled a man with 
extended arms. The idolatrous Jews were accustomed 
to sacrifice, not only doves, rams, calves, and bulls, but 
often their own children. This valley was hkewise call- 
ed Tophct^ a detestation, ao abomination ; from Toph^ to 
vomit with loathing. Others derive it from Toph^ a 
drum ; because the perpetrators of these horrible sacri- 
fices, beat drums that the shrieks of the infants who were 
burned, should not be heard. The pious king Josiah 
caused it to be polluted, and made a place of desecration, 
of loathing, and horror. There were cast all kinds of 
filth, together with the carcases of beasts, and the un- 
buried bodies of criminals who had been executed. Con- 
tinual fires were necessary, in order to consume these, 
lest the putrefaction should infect the air; and there 
worms were ahvays feeding on the remaining relics. 
Here w^e see the origin of the expression, " Where their 
worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched," 

This valley was further signalized by two memorable 
occurrences. The army of Sennacherib, consisting of 
185,000 men, were slain in one night, and their bodies 
consumed by fire. And also the Babylonians made a 
great slaughter of the idolatrous Jews ; aud their car- 
cases, more than could be buried, were left a prey to the 
birds of the air, and the beasts of the field. The place 
seems to have been used as a place of punishment, and 
likewise, as a place where the dead bodies of criminals 
w^ere buried or burned. That the Jews associated this 
place with the idea of future punishment is very likely ; 


?ind that tlie}^ may iiave coDsidered it tbe very spot 
where, according to their own prophets, thei^ should 
he a great gathering of the nations to judgment is more 
than proba-bie. if the reader will ca«t his eye on the 
■map of Jerusalem, he wiill perceive that the locality wiU 
^gree with many things relating to a future judgment. 

The Valley of Jehoshaphat is on the east of Jerusalem-, 
>and is called the Valley of Judgment. Jehoshaphat 
means " The Lord judge." A-s tbe feet -of Christ are to 
«tand on the Mount @f OHves ^'' in that day ^'' we can per 
ceive, that ^s the mountains rise behind, his face will be 
towards Jerusalem ; and if the nations are gathered be- 
fore him, in tbe Valley of Jelwshaphat, Gehenna will be 
on his left hand ; and there probably many of tl:>e wicked 
nations will be consumed with fire from heaven. 

We are now to enquire, Whether the fires of Gehenna 
that are to destroy the wicked will be perpetual ? We 
reply, Na I. iBecause tbe word a^o?^ o,nd awnas^ trans- 
lated everlasting, for ever, &»c., do not necessarily imply 
this. 2. Because the burned eities of Sodom and Go- 
morrha, that are -feet forth as an example, " that have suf- 
fered the vengeance of eternal fire," do not continue to 
burn. 3, Because the whole land, in a cleansed state,- 
has been solemnly deeded to Abraham and to his seed, 
which is Ghrist, and unless they possess the whole, this 
^>romise ^vill fail. 4. Because the cleansing of the dead 
sea, caused by the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha, 
is a matter of specific promise ; affording presumptive 
evidence that Gehenna wiR be cleansed likewise. 5. Be- 
cause as tbe wicked are to be burned up, devoured, con- 
sumed, killed, destroyed, to suffer the complete extinc- 
tion of their beiHg, the fires having accomplished their 
work, will not be needed, 6. Because the existence of 
Si perpetual valley of fire in the immediate vicinity of the 
righteous, that had been used for tbe destruction of tbe 
wicked, would mar tbe happiness of tbe redeemed. 7.. 
And, because there are no passages of Scripture, w^hich, 
when properly expounded, teach that the fires of Gehen- 
na will be perpetual. 

As Gehenna in the N, T. is used ^<^t Topbet, and the 
Valley of Hinnom, in the 0. T., it will be necessary first 
to trace the meaning of these terms in the Scriptures of 
the 0. T 


The locality of Gehenna is recorded in Josh, 15 : 8, 
" And the border (of the lot of Judah) went up by the 
Valley of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite ; 
the same is Jerusalem ; and the border went up the top 
of the mountain that Heth before the Valley of Hinnonh 
westward, which is at the end of the valley of the giants 
northward." Josh. 18:16. The lot of Benjamin, " The 
border came down to the end of the mountain that lietb 
before the valley of the son of Hinnom^ and which is in 
the valley of the giants on the north, and descended to 
the Valley of Hinnom, to the side of Jebusi on the soutby 
and descended to En-nogeL" Jer. 19 : 2. 

Pollution of Gehenna J 1 Kings H : 7," Then did Solo- 
mon build a high place for Chemosh, the abomination of 
Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem^ and for Mo- 
lech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.'^ 2 
Chron. 28 : 3, Ahaz " burnt incense in the valley of the 
son of Hinnom^ and burnt his children in the fire^ after the 
abominations of the heathen whom the Lord had cast out 
before the children of Is^rael." 2 Chron. 33 : 6, " Manas- 
seh caused his children to pass through the jfire in the 
valley of the son of Hinnom .*" also he observed times, and 
used enchantments,, aad used witchcraft, and dealt with 
a familiar spii it y Sind with wizards: he wrought much 
evil in the sight of the Lord, to provoke him to anger. 

The desecratimi of Gehenna. 2 Kings 23 : 10, " And 
Josiah defiled Tophet, which is in the valley of the 
children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or 
his daughter to pass through the fmre to Molech." That 
Gehenna w^as afterwards made a receptacle for filth we 
gather from the Rabbins. AVe likewise read of the de- 
secration of the brook Kidron^ that ran through the val- 
ley of Hinnom. 

Gehenna was a place of punishment by bterning. Lev. 
20 : 14, " If a man take a wife and her mother, it is wick- 
edness : they shall be burnt with fire^hothhe and they." 
In the 2d to 6th v, the people of the land were to destroy 
the worshippers of Molech, w^hich was probaWy done in 
Gehenna, where the image was placed. Lev, 20: 9,, 
The daughter of any priest that profaned herself, was to 
be bv.rned with fire, 

Jer 7 : 30, ^'^ The children of Judah have done evil in 
my sight, saith the Lord....they have built the high 


places of Tophet^ vjhich is i7t the valley of the son of Hin- 
noTTij to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire... 
Therefore behold the days come, saith the Lord, that it 
shall no more be called Tophet^ nor the valley of the son 
of Hinnom^ but the valley of slaughter : for they shall 
bury in Tophet till there be no place. And the carcases 
of this people shall be meat for the fowls of heaven, and 
for the beasts of the earth ; and none shall fray them 

Let the reader here read, also, the following passages. 
Jer 19 : 1-13 ; 32 : 35 ; 48 : 8 ; Isa. 30 : 30-33. 

In Gehenna the army of Sennacherib wa^ destroyed, 
2 Kings 19 : 35. 

Joel 3 : 2, " I will also gather all nations, and will bring 
. them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead 
with them there for my people and for my heritage Is- 
rael, whom they have scattered among the nations, and 
parted my land." 

Ezek. 38 and 39 c, and Eev. 16: 16, relate to destruc- 
tions apparently to occur in other places. 

From histories and prophecies we perceive that Ge- 
henna has been, and is to be a place of punishment ; and 
as it has been, so it may be again, a place of punishment 
by fire ; but it is not a place where the wicked are now 
bemg punished, nor will it ever be a place where the 
wicked shall be kept alive in perpetual torments, God 
surnamed the place. The Valley of Slaughter. To affirm 
that the wicked are to be kept aUve there for ever, is to 
charge God with naming the place inappropriately ! 

We are now prepared to examine the meaning of Ge- 
henna^ in the N. T. We have said that the word occurs 
twelve times ; but it is not recorded of Christ that he 
used it twelve times, and he is the only person who used 
the word in the N. T. ; and only to the Jews, who un- 
derstood its import. In Jam. 3:6," The tongue is a 
fire, a world of iniquity : so is the tongue among our 
members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on 
fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell." 
" Hupo tcs geennZs ;" set on fire of Gehenna. But the 
Vatican MS. and several of the more ancient MSS. read, 
li/upo tts genms ; kindled in the bjrth. ( Genna for gC' 
nea ; see Steph. Lex.) The same idea may be found in 
Ps. 58 : 3, " The wicked are estranged from the Avomb : 


they go astray as soon as they he born, speaking lies." 
It was easy for transcribers to have mistaken these two 
words in Greek. Consult Steph. Th. Gr. torn., 4 p. 672, 
and Valpy, torn. 1, p. 400, word Gehenna. " The tongue 
is a fire : as the tongue engenders or inflames its succes- 
sors {tes geneseoSy) so it is engendered or inflamed by its 
predecessors (hupo genms)^ Thus geneseos extends its 
eense and its efiicacy equally to the following connection 
oi genms for geennls. 

The word Gehenna then is no where used in the whole 
Greek Scriptures, Old and New, except by our Lord him- 
self, and only in his parabolical discourses, in Matthew, 
Mark, and Luke. See Penn's Translation of The New 
Covenant, hkewise his Annotations. 

As the same conversations are recorded by the difie- 
rent Evangelists, we suppose that Christ used the word 
Gehenna eight times only, recorded mfour conversations. 

Mat. 5:21, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of 
old time. Thou shalt not kill ; and whosoever shall kill, 
shall be in danger of the judgment : But I say unto you, 
That whoseover is angry with his brother without a cause, 
shall be in danger of the judgment-: and whosoever shall 
say to his brother, Eaca, shall be in danger of the coun- 
cil: but whosoever shall say. Thou fool, shall be in danger 
of hell fire." 

Whosoever shall say, tnbre, enoqjios estai eis tm gehen- 
"nan tou puros : Mweh, or Fool, or Apostate ! will be 
deserving of the fire of Gehenna ; or will deserve to be 
burned in the valley of Hinnom. 

Here are three crimes of different degrees of enormity 
which Christ declared deserved to be punished with three 
different degrees of severity. 1. Rash and needless an- 
ger towards a brother. This deserved the judgment of 
the lower court, even as he who * killed.' This lower 
court consisted of a council of twenty-three who had 
power in some cases to inflict death in a mild manner. — 
2. The using of offensive terms regarding a brother, such 
as Raca, a vain and empty fellow, deserved such punish- 
ment as the Sanhedrin, or great council of the nation, 
could inflict, such as stoning. 3. But the holding of a 
worthy brother up to the world as a vile apostate from 
Christ, deserved the punishment of burning in the valley 
of Hinnom. We suppose this to be the meaning of this 


passage That every guilty action is liable to an appro- 
priate and corresponding degree of punishment. As 
punishment was inflicted by the Sanhedrin^ of burning 
m the valley of Hinnom, it is possible that our Savior 
alludes to such punishments only. We have no proof 
that he alluded here to any punishment to take place 
after the resurrection ; but if he had such reference, he 
used such burnings as were usually practised there, as 
a pattern of such a burning as should then take place ; 
which, though terrible enough, would necessarily soon 
terminate in the consumption and the utter extinction of 
the being of the suflerer — a deprivation of all conscious- • 

Mat. 5 : 29, " Therefore, if thy right eye insnare thee, 
pluck it out, and throw it away : for it is better for thee 
to lose one of thy members, than that thy whole body be 
cast into hell^ ( Gehenna). And if thy right hand insnare 
thee, cut it off, and throw it away : it is better for thee 
to lose one of thy members, than that thy whole body be 
cast in hell^ {Gehenna)^ 18: 8, "Wherefore, if thy 
hand, or thy foot insnare tbee, cut it off, and throw it 
away ; it is better for thee to enter lame or maimed into 
life, than having two hands or two feet to be cast into 
[to pur to aio?iion) the fire of the age. 9 v. And if thine 
eye insnare thee, pluck it out, and throw it away ; it is 
better for thee to enter one-eyed into hfe, than having 
two eyes to be cast into {ten gehennan tou puros) the 
Gehenna of fire." Mark 9 : 43-49. In recording this 
conversation, Mark adds to the words of Matthew (eis 
to pur to asbesto?i, twice) " into the fire the unquencha- 
ble." And three times, " Where their worm dieth not 
and their fire is not quenched." The first addition is of 
very doubtful authority, and the second addition should 
occur but once in the 48 v. as the other two places are 
not found in any of the ancient MSS. S. L. (hie etiam, 
V. 43). The transcribers, since the 7th century, have 
tried their hands so much in the embellishment of the 
43d to 50th verse, that they have involved the authority 
of the whole in doubt ; still we shall treat the whole as 
if it were genuine. 

Professor Stuart places no reliance upon these pas- 
sages to prove the existence of a hell of fire, either now 
or hereafter. Certainly they cannot be made compatible 


with his notion of the continued existence of the soul in 
torment. The whole may be intended to set forth by 
eimihtudes, that it is better to make any sacrifices, even 
to the most valuable of oui members, if they are likely 
to insnare us from duty rather than fail to obtain eternal 
life. Part with the most fondly cherished, and seeming- 
ly valuable acquisition, if its tendency is detrimental to 
your Christian character, and live for ever ; keep it,»and 
become insnared by it, and you subject yourself to the 
fire of Gehenna. Here is life, and the dreadful depriva- 
tion of life, contrasted, and as the life refers to a future 
state, so the punishment of death refers to a future state. 
Not a word is said here about the soul^ in the burning 
up of the body in Gehenna ; but the soul^ or beings is 
necessarily implied as being hkewise burned or utterly 
destroyed. Hence we are directed, " To fear him who is 
able to destroy both soul and body, (both life and being,) 
in Gehenna^ The argument of our Savior is this : It 
is better to have a part of us destroyed, than to have the 
whole being destroyed, which must result from the whole 
body being cast into the fires of Gehenna. If the soul, 
as a separate living entity, were not destroyed by this 
process, the argument of our Savior would be invalida- 
ted. For then w^e might still live after our whole body 
had been burned, as modern theology teaches. But 
Christ teaches that the destruction of the whole body 
involves the total extermination of life. The punishment 
that had been inflicted in Gehenna on many, is made the 
symbol of the punishment that will be inflicted by Christ 
at the judgment. The punishments that have taken 
place in Gehenna, destroyed life, and the torment was 
never protracted beyond a day, so the punishment 
that will take place in Gehenna will destroy life in a 
Umited period. 

But the common version of Mat. 18:8, speaks of 
''- everlasting fire." Even supposing the original would 
bear this construction, it would only imply that the in- 
strument of the punishment would be perpetual ; but we 
shall show presently that some of these " everlasting 
fires" have already been extinguished. " Who can dwell, 
or Hve, with everlasting burnings ?" Isa. 33 : 14. Clear- 
ly none ; for the obvious reason, they would be totally 
consumed. Allowing the words, " Where their worm 


dieth not>, and the fire is not quenched," to be genuine 
In one place ^ and what then ? Then the passage more 
surely teaches the destruction of the wicked that are cast 
therein, for that whieh escapes the fire, the worms will 
consume ; and when there is nothing for the fire and the 
worms to consume, then the fire and the worms will 
themselves become extinct 

This is a quotation from Isa, 66 : 2a, " And it -shall 
come to pass, that from one new moon to anoth^ and 
from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to wor- 
ship before me, saith the Lord. And they shall go forth 
and look upon the carcasses of the men that have trans- 
gressed againsi: me : for tlieir worm shall not die, neither 
ehall their fire be quenched ; and they shall be an abhor- 
ring unto all flesh ;" till, of course, the carcases are en- 
tirely consumed • for few will contend that carcasses are 

To show the sense in which the Greeks used the Scrip- 
ture phrases of ^'eis to pur to (isbeston^'^'' and *•'- puri asbes- 
tOy^'' the fire the unquenchable, we quote from the Bible 
Examiner the language of a learned Christian Bishop, 
near the time of Christ. 

Eusebius, who is supposed to have be^i born at 
Cesanea. A. D.. 267^ and of which city he became Bishop 
in 315., in his history of the Christian Church, which has 
gained for him the title of the Father of Ecclesiastical 
History, gives an account of tJie martyrdom of such of 
the saints as had suffered death for the gospel's sake. In 
his history, book vi., ch. 41, he gives an account of those 
who were martyred at Alexandria, He speaks of them 
as follows : ^' The first of these was Juhan, a man afl[lict- 
ed with the gout, neither able to walk nor stand, who, 
with two others that carried him, was arraigned. Of 
these, the one immediately denied, but the other, named 
Cronion, surnaraed Eunus, and the aged Julian himself, 
iaaving confessed the Lord, was carried on camels 
throughout the city — a very large one as you know — 
and in this elevation were scourged, and finally consumed 
in an immense^re^ {puri asbesto). After these, Epima- 
chus and Alexander, who had continued for a long time 
in prison, enduring innumerable suffering from the 
scourges and scrapers, were also destroyed in an im- 
mensejire^'^ {puri asbesto). 


Here, theiiy we have the same phrase that is irsed m 
the Bible, used by a learned and eloquent Christian 
Bishop only about three hundred years after Christ ; and 
no reader cau be at loss to understand its import in the 
connection. No one can fail to see that the expression 
" unquenchable fire" affords no support to the commou 
theory of eternal torment — ^but instead of that it is used 
to denote a fire that utterly consumes whatever is sub- 
mitted to its action. If the expression puri asbesto proves 
that the wicked will be tormented eternally, then jEuse- 
bias taught that the martyrs had l>een tormented eternal- 
ly. If Eusebius taught that the martyrs were burned ta 
ashes, then John the Baptist and Jesus Christ declared 
that wicked men should be thus burned in Gehenna. 

Surely Eusebius does not teach that the martyrs wil5 
be tormented eternally 1 L 

Mat. 23: 15, "Woe unto yon, scribes and Pharisees^ 
hypocrites ! for ye compass sea and land to make one 
proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him two-fold 
more the child of heU than yourselves." A child of Ge- 

V. 33, '^ Ye serpents, ?/^ generation of vipers^how can ye 
escape the damnation of hell ?" Gehenna, Son of Ge- 
henna means one deserving of, or doomed to Gehenna. 
Both passages teach the utter destruction of these hypo- 
crites in Gehenna. 

Our Savior, foretelling the persecutions" that should 
come upon his disciples, and assuring them of the con- 
tinual providence of God, warns them against apostacy. 

Mat 10 : 26-28,. " Fear them not therefore : for there 
is nothing covered^ that shall not be revealed; and hid^ 
that shall not be known. What I tell you in darkness,. 
that speak ye in light : and what ye hear in the ear, that 
preach ye upon the house-tops. And fear not thena 
which kill the body^ but are not able to kill the soul : 
but rather fear him which i& able to destroy both soul 
and body in hell." In Gehenna. 

Luke 12 : 4^ 5, " And I say unto you> my friends. Be 
not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that, have 
no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you 
whom ye shall fear : Fear him, which after he hath killed^ 
hath power to cast into hell ; yea, I say unto you, Fear 
him." To cast into Gehenna. 


Matthew, who wrote in the Hebrew idiom, uses the 
term soul and body, as comprehending the whole being 
which only God could kill so as never to be raised to life 
again. But Luke, who wrote in purer Greek, in relating 
the same discourse, omits the term soul. Harwood 
translates Mat. 10: 28, thus : " Pear not those who can 
only inflict upon you bodily pain and torture, and deprive 
you of a precarious being — but whose power extends no 
farther. But let that great Being be the object of your 
fear, who can involve both soul and body in total and 
everlasting destruction. Let that Being, I repeat it, be 
the object of your constant fear." 

This rendering, we think, expresses the true idea. 
These are the two passages in the N. T. which being 
parallel, are equal only to one, that Professor Stuart 
thinks teach eternal torments. None but those who are 
completely blinded by the idea of the immortality of the 
soul, would ever think of finding it in these passages. — 
The one plainly teaches that God is able to destroy the 
soul^ and clearly intimates, if the warning be not heeded, 
that he will do it : that he will destroy the soul and body ; 
that is, both life and being in Gehenna. Men might kill 
the body or person, for a time ; but could not prevent 
his resurrection to hfe again : but God could not only 
kill, or take away the hfe we at present have from Adam, 
but could destroy him altogether. This destruction 
would be an everlasting destruction. 

Eev. W. G. Moncrieff, Edinburg, observes, that, "The 
only legitimate mode of interpreting the text is, in our 
opinion, to understand it as affirming that God only can 
destroy a soul, a life, a human being's existence for ever ; 
and that this will be the doom of all apostates and of all 
the ungodly. Persecutors may destroy a Christian's hfe 
now, and for a little, but, at " the last day," he will be 
raised to ' glory, honor, and immortality.' When God 
destroys a man, a soul, a life, or a living being in Gehen- 
na, he is quenched for ever ; the second death is to be 
followed by no resurrection. ^ He who findeth his Hfe,' 
he who keeps his life at the expense of his love to Jesus, 
shall at last lose it in Gehenna's fire ; and he that loseth 
bis life {pmchen\ or lays it down for Jesus, shall find it 
at the resurrection ^f the just, and retain it through un- 
ending ages." 


We bave now examined every passage where Gehenna 
IS named, and we find no expression indicating that the 
wicked will be kept alive in torments ; but we do find a 
place where they will be miserably destroyed. Please 
remember, that Paul and his confederates, though they 
preached " the ivhole counsel of God,^'' and kept back no- 
thing that was profitable," never preached ' a Gehenna^ 
to the Gentiles ; neither does it appear that all the wick- 
ed will ultimately be destroyed in that particular place : 
while it does appear that, that place must be thoroughly 
cleansed from all its abominations, in the restitution. — 
Jesus Christ, in referring to Gehenna, in his four para- 
bohc discourses to the Jews, undoubtedly referred to 
Tophet, or the valley of Hinnom, as a place for the exe- 
cution of death, in a shameful and an accursed manner, 
by burning. 

This phrase will not countenance the dogma of endless 
misery. It occurs ^\q times : all in that highly symboli- 
cal book the Apocalipse ; viz.. Rev. 19 : 20 ; 20 : 10, 14, 
15; 21 : 8. In three of these passages symbols of sys- 
tems are prophesied of, and in two of them the wicked 
are spoken of as suftering in the lake of fire the second 
death. The lake of fire then symbolizes the entire des- 
truction of whatever is cast into it. So if wicked men 
are cast into it, they must necessarily be burned up. — 
For, " who can dwell (or live) with perpetual burnings ?" 
We quote all the passages. Kev. 19 : 20, *' And the wild 
beast was taken, and with him the false prophet.. ..These 
both were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with 
sulphur. And the remnant were slain with the sword of 
him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out 
of his mouth : and all the fowls of the air were filled with 
their flesh." Observe here that the beast and the false 
prophet were cast into the lake of fire, while their armies 
of men were eaten by the fowls, and were not burned. 
Rev. 20 : 9, " And they (the nations) went up on the 
breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the 
saints about, and the beloved city : and //r^ came down 
from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the 
devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of the 


fire and sulphur^ where [are] the wild beast and t^e false 
prophet, or the propound er of false doctrine, (kai basa- 
nisthesontai hetneras kai nuktos,) and they shall be tor- 
mented, or tried, day and night, (eis tons aidnas ton 
aiunun,) until the ages of ages." The preposition m, as a 
secondary meaning, denotes motion towards^ or tendency^ 
so as to arrive at, and then should be rendered to or i^ito, 
when applied to place ; and untii^ when applied to time ; 
as kai elthen eis gen Israel. Eis here refers to place, and 
came to^ or into^ the land of Israel. JEis eelion katadunta 
dainuntai. Render eis here as referring to time, they 
feast until sunset. Our text referring to thiie, we trans- 
late according to the rule, until the ages of the ages^ 
which rendering is strictly literal. (See Erving Gram- 
mar, p. 149.) The word basinisthesontai^ is the future 
tense plural of basanoSj a touch-stone to try metals, and 
means a trial, inquiry, or examination, to ascertain the 
genuineness, or purity of any thing — hence, metaphori- 
cally the word is used for an examination to obtain proof, 
to confirm any fact — torture employed to obtain evidence, 
or extort truth — a proof given, or obtained, a pledge : — 
Dounai tibasance^ to submit any thing to trial, to put to 
proof — dounai basanon^ to give proof of any thing : — the 
plural basanoi, instruments of torture used to extort con- 
fessions. Now if the lake of fire is used as a figure, as in 
1 Pet. 4 : 12, *^ Think it not strange concerning the fiery 
trial that is to try you" ; and 1 : 7 ; 1 Cor. 3 : 13, and 
Eev. 3 : 10, then ba^anisthesontai., should be rendered, 
they shall be tried. And the verse will mean that whatever 
is symbolized by the beast and the false prophet and the 
dragon shall be tried till the end of the age. But if the 
fire here be taken as literal, then it will most certainly 
imply the complete destruction of the things cast into it. 

The word baziyiizo is rendered ^055e<^, in Mat. 14 : 24. 
* Tossed with waves ; and toiling^ in Mark 6 : 48. In 
Luke 16 : 23, 28, it might be rendered " tried by torture." 
If the dragon and Satan, is here intended to represent 
the literal devil, it is elsewhere said that he will be de- 
Btroyed. Heb. 2 : 14 ; Mark 1 : 24 ; Luke 4 : 34; 1 John 

Rev. 20: 14, {Kai ho thanatos kai ho hades ^) And 
death and hades, the grave, or dominion of death, were 
cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death^ the 


lake of the fire. And whosoever was not found wpitten 
in the book of hfe was cast into the lake of the fire. 

Eev. 21 : 8, " The fearful, and unbelieving, and the 
abominable and murderers, and whoremongers, and sor- 
cerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part 
in the lake which burneth with fire and sulphur : which 
is the second death." 

As this second death is a repetition of the first, and as 
the first death must terminate before the second can com- 
mence, and as the first death was not eternal misery, so 
neither can the repetition be. As the first death deprives 
of conscious being, so will the second. Some understand 
the first death as resulting from our connection with 
Adam, and the second death as resulting from our own 
neglect to come to Christ, the second Adam, /or life. In 
either case, the word second is fatal to the dogma of end- 
less torture; much more to that unmeaning phrase^ 
" the death that never dies." 

Pire only pains as it acts to the destruction of living 
substance ; if the fire did not tend to destroy it would 
not pain. To be cast into a lake of fire burning with 
sulphur, certainly implies the entire combustion of all 
combustible substances. And such is man. Eemember^ 
if there be any part of man indestructible, that part can- 
not be pained or even injured by fire. Ajax was fabled 
to have been dipped into the river Styx, in the infernal 
regions, by which he was rendered invulnerable to all 
injury, to all pain, excepting in his right heel, by which 
he was held. But this theology of fables we are oppos- 
ing, first endows the sinner with incorruptibihty of na- 
ture and consequent immortality — ^thus rendering him 
incapable of sufiering, torment, or decay — and then builds 
upon this fancied endowment the contradictory assump- 
tion, that the sinner will have eternal conscious existence 
in torments 1 Why, sir, if the sinner were incorruptible, 
fiame could not harm him ; hghtning could not scathe 
him ; he would not be susceptible of sufiering or decay 
of any kind ; and he would be as truly immortal as will 
be the righteous, and as free from pain. 

As in these passages, death and the grave are per- 
sonified, the fair conclusion is, that the fire here symbo- 
lizes complete destruction. We are not justified in mak- 
ing the one part only symbolical. Death and the grave, 


or hades, not being persons, must necessarily be made 
figures, and so the other must be construed as figurative 
also. But figurative or literal, the fire imports the de- 
struction of all things cast into it, and the death of all 
the living. The wild beast will be prevented from de- 
stroying ; the dragon from deceiving the nations ; and 
the false prophet from deceiving God's people. 

As the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomor- 
rha, with fire and brimstone from heaven, are set forth 
as a pattern of the aionian burning, or the burning at 
that age, and as the burning of these produced the sul- 
phurous lake Asphaltites, or Dead Sea, so the final de- 
struction of the wicked may produce another lake, which 
may be for a time a lake of fire ; but as the Dead Sea is 
to be cleansed, so Gehenna and its lake of fire will be 
cleansed and delivered over to Abraham and to Christ 
in a heavenly condition, according to the terms of the 
everlasting covenant. 


The phrase " the lower parts of the earth," is used for 
the sea-coasts, for the islands of the sea, and for the 
grave, but never for a place of conscious torment. 

Ps. 63 : 9, " But those that seek my soul y to destroy ity 
shall go into the lower parts of the earth ;" (the grave). 
Isa. 44 : 23, '' Sing, ye heavens ; for the Lord hath 
done it : shout ye lower parts of the earth : break forth 
into singing ye mountains, O forest, and every tree 
therein : for the Lord hath redeemed Jacob, and glorifi- 
ed himself in Israel." The lower parts of the earth, in 
this sublime poetical personification, may mean the sea- 
coasts, the valleys, or the grave opened at the resurrec- 
tion of its inmates. Ps. 139 : 15, " My substance was 
not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and cu- 
riously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth." Here 
the womb seems to be imphed. Eph. 4:9," Now that 
he (Christ) ascended, what is it but that he also descend- 
ed first into the lower parts of the earth," the grave : 
for the resurrection of Christ is here spoken of : though 
perhaps here, the phrase, the lower parts of the earth, 
contrasted with Christ's exaltation, may mean no more 
than the deepest abasement. The phrase occurs like- 


wise in Ez. 31 c. and 32 c, where it is used interchanga- 
bly with grave, pit, and sheol ; but no where does it 
mean a place of conscious torment. 


This word occurs but once in the N. T., viz., 2 Peter 
2:4," For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but 
cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains 
of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment." 

The word translated hell here is tartarosas. Observe, 
it is 7Wt men, but migels who are spoken of; and these 
not as now undergoing punishment, but as reserved to 
be punished at a future period. Moreover, their chains 
are chains of darkness ; a highly figurative expression. 
In the 9th v. The unjust are likewise said to be reserved 
" unto the day of judgment to be punished." Then it is 
clear, that neither angels nor men receive their punish- 
ment before the day of judgment, for rewards and punish- 
ments are reserved for that day. 

The original meaning of Tartarus seems to have been 
an abyss ; the thick darkness that is supposed to encircle 
the universe — the bounds or verge of the material sys- 
tem. The Pagans afterwards perverted this w^ord, and 
made it signify a place beneath the earth, where the Ti- 
tans, the giants, that they fabled to have rebelled against 
Jupiter, were confined ; and as the Pagans originated 
the idea of the immortality of the soul, so requiring a 
place to put these fanciful inventions, these immortal, 
tangible intangibles, that could see and be seen, and yet 
be invisible ; could feel and be felt, and yet be too et he- 
rial for cognizance ; they put them in Tartarus, so deep 
that none could obtain a correct knowledge of their exis- 
tence. But if the original meaning of the word Tartarus 
be in perfect harmony with revelation, and the chief of 
these angels be called ** The prince of the power of the 
air"; (Eph. 2: 2,) although the word has been used in 
later ages by Pagans, in their fables, to designate their 
receptacle of wicked souls; and although pFofessed 
Christians have adopted these fables, and inserted them 
into their creeds ; we feel no inclination to attempt to 
make a Pagan of Peter to save these precious sectarian 
creeds! We assume, therefore, that Peter used the 


word Tartarus to express the region of the atmosphere, 
or abyss. 


"We have now examined all those words that are trans- 
lated hellj and all others that bear any relation to the 
word hell ; and the result is, the Bible does not teach 
that there is any place now in existence, where the wick- 
ed dead are in torments. Nay, that neither the wicked 
nor the righteous are collected in one common receptacle, 
excepting so far as all of them who have died, are in the 
dominion of death — that is, in sheol^ or in JiMdes — in a 
STATE of entire unconsciousness ; of destitution of all life, 
and not in any particular place. Further, that none of 
the terms referring to the future punishment of the wick- 
ed imply that the wicked will be torme/nted for ever ; but 
that many of these terms do most emphatically teach 
their utter extermination. These facts, taken with the 
mass of direct, positive, and plain testimony, that the 
wicked will be so destroyed as to be entirely put out of 
existence, as living beings, make assurance doubly sure, 
that the universe will be entirely purified of all wicked 
beings ; not by rendering them holy, but by their anni- 
hilation. Amen. Kejoi'ce, every creature, that universal 
holiness and universal happiness, will ultimately prevail ! 
We have seen, too, that as the word hell conveys an en- 
tirely diflferent meaning now, from that which it formerly 
bore, the word hell should be entirely blotted out of any 
revision, or new translation of the Scriptures ; there be- 
ing no Hebrew, nor Greek word, that corresponds with 
it, or indeed that bears the slightest aiBnity to it in its 
present acceptation. The ideas that are now so preva- 
lent respecting hell, have been necessitated from the er- 
roneous belief, that has increased of late years, of the 
immortality of the soul, the consciousness of the dead, 
and the everlasting misery of the wicked : which three 
errors have well nigh subverted the gospel of the Son of 
God. The words fcom which hell is now rendered, should 
either be anghcized, and left untranslated, as is baptism ; 
or should have a corresponding English synonym : as 
sheol and hades^ death, and the dominion of death ; Ge- 
henna^ the Valley of Hinnom ; Tartarus^ the outer re- 


gions, or regions of darkness : and Ahussos^ an abyss, an 
abyss of waters, or a profound deep. Nothing can be 
more absurd than to translate all these words by the 
word hell^ burdened as it is, with its present theological 

The terms applied to the ultimate destiny of the wicked, 
are utterly at variance with the fable of " eternal misery ^"^ 
and of the present suffering of the wicked dead in any 
place called a hell of fire ; as these terms all imply the 
extinction and not the preservation of life and conscious- 
ness ; and no honest interpreter of the Scriptures will 
henceforth attempt to reconcile these terms with eternal 
life in misery. Consider a few of them : Death — second 
death — perish — utterly perish — devour — destroy — cut off 
— burn up — consume — utterly consume — destruction — 
perdition — corruption — they shall be as though they 
had not been, and annihilation. The tire that will con- 
sume the wicked, will be " afire that consumeth to des- 
truction.^'' Job 31 : 12. The theologians that are de- 
termed to sustain their tottering sectarian creeds, must 
invent some other words more pliant, and now less known 
than the terms we have examined. May we not indulge 
the hope that some of these professed teachers for the 
sake of honesty, and the truth, will abandon their vain 
traditions for the teachings of the Bible ? Who is on 
the Lord's side ? Who ? Who ? 





"We are now to examine what the Bible teaches rela- 
tive to this awful subject. We have already proved that 
man is a unit — that the soul of man comprehends his 
whole being — that man is a soul — that man has no soul, 
nor spirit, that can exist, as a living thing, apart from 
his body — that man in his whole nature is mortal ; which 
of course implies that his body is mortal, his soul is mor- 
tal — and that his spirit, being merely the principle of life, 
is neither mortal, nor immortal — that it has not and can- 
not have conscious existence independently of the or- 
ganized being it animated — that the compound being, 
man, becomes entirely unconscious in death, " so that a 
man hath no pre-eminence (in death) above a beast," 
" they all have one (ruah) breath or spirit," " they are 
all made of the dust, and all turn to dust again :" Ecc. 
3 : 19 — that one event happeneth to all, to the righteous 
and the wicked ; Ecc. 9 : 2. Death " destroyeth the 
perfect and the wicked^" and " no man can dehver his 
soul from the hand of sheol, or death." Ps. 89: 48, 
" The soul (see margin,) of the hypocrite dies in youth." 
Job 36 : 14. Of the wicked, says the Psalmist 49 : 19, 
margin, " His soul shall go to the generation of his fa- 
thers, they shall never see light. For like sheep they 
are laid in the grave ; death shall feed on them." 14 v. 

As we have already proved that all the dead are un- 
conscious in their graves, if there be no resurrection they 
have perished like brutes ; they have been already blot- 
ted out of existence. Not a question could have arisen 
respecting the destiny of the wicked, had it not been as- 


Slimed that the wicked were immortal, and consequently 
those numerous threatenings that speak of the death, 
destruction, consumption, perishing, &c., of the wicked, 
must, to be consistent with the notion of his immortality, 
be explained away, because their most obvious sense 
teach that the wicked will be utterly exterminated. 


As all the dead are dependent upon a resurrection for 
all future hfe and consciousness, so if the wicked do not 
rise, they cannot experience any more punishment than 
the continuance of the infliction of death upon them, 
which would then be in their case, an everlasting punish- 
ment. It is quite certain that the resurrection of the 
wicked is not clearly taught in the Old Testament. Dan. 
12 : 2, as it stands in the common version, seems to teach 
it, but a better translation would give a different sense. 
" And many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth 
shall awake : these to everlasting life, those to reproach 
and everlasting abhorrence." This verse, thus interpre- 
ted, would rather seem to teach the ?zc>w resurrection of 
the wicked. Isa. 26 : 19-21, has been supposed to teach 
it, but by contrasting the 19 v. with the 14 v., it certain- 
ly only teaches the resurrection of the righteous. Jer. 
31 : 15, does not teach it, for the resurrection there taught 
is a joyful resurrection. None of the threatenings of the 
O. T. teach it. We think all the arguments drawn only 
from the 0. T. are not sufficient to say that they teach 
a resurrection to the wicked, though that glorious event 
is clearly taught of the righteous. The other texts that 
are supposed to teach the resurrection of the wicked are 
the following: — Eom. 14: 11, 12; Acts 24: 15; John 
5 : 28, 29 ; 2 Pet. 2 : 9-12 ; Gal. 6 : 7, 8 ; Job 4 : 8, 9 ; 
and Pro. 22 : 8. 


If the wicked are preserved ahve in torments, or in 
any sense, then this penalty will never be inflicted. Any 
penalty that comes short of terminating the being of the 
wicked, is not the penalty of the law. 

" The wages of sin is death," (Eom. 6 : 23,) as con- 


trasted with endless life. " The 8oul that sinneth it shall 
die ;'''' Ez. 18 : 4, 20. " Sin, when it is finished, bringeth 
forth deatk'^ ; Jam. 1:15. Any torment or punishment 
that comes short of terminating the very being of the 
sufferer, is not death, and therefore is not the penalty of 
the law% which law has not reversed but confirmed the 
first judgment : " Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou 
return," for sinners are to be " ashes under the feet of 
the righteous." 


The English word jjerish^ means to die ; to wither ; 
to decay ; to waste away ; to be destroyed ; to come to 
nothing ; to fail entirely, or to be extirpated. 2 Kings 
9, to lose life ; to be deprived of being. The Bible al- 
w^ays implies death, corruption, destruction, loss of being. 
2 Pet. 2 : 12, " And shall utterly perish in their own 

Such is the meaning of the Enghsh word pe?'ish, and 
when applied to living beings, in no case can it be made 
consistent with continued preservation in life. When 
appUed to inanimate things, it impHes their total destruc- 
tion. Mat. 9 : 17, " Else the bottles break, the wine 
runneth out, and the bottles (apolountai) perish: but 
they put new wine into new bottles, and both are pre- 
served.'''' Here perish stands in contrast with to be pre^ 
served ; and, of course, if a thing has perished, it cannot 
possibly mean preserved. So when the same term is 
applied to men, it can never be made consistent with 
preservation in any shape whatever. So it never means 
eternal life in misery. It has been said that there is an 
exception to this rule in 2 Pet. 3:6," Whereby the 
world that then was, being overflowed with water (apo- 
leto) perishedy But if they look to the very next verse 
they will perceive that world which * perished' stands 
opposed to " the heavens and the earth which are now," 
as not being the same as that which was overflowed with 
water, and will continue overflowed till the new heavens 
and earth are made to appear. For Peter says, "Never- 
theless we, according to his promise^ look for new hea- 
vens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." 
But does not Peter say, " The earth and the works that 


are therein shall be burned up." If the reader will turn 
to our remarks on the third heavens, he will perceive 
that world has truly perished, of which Peter spake, and 
still remains overflow^ed — as a habitation for men, it does 
not exist. But Peter specially refers to ''Hhe world of 
the ungodly^'*'' who " perished." Truly, they were 7iot 

When applied to animals, it likewise implies death, en- 
tire destruction. Mat. 8 : 32, "■ Behold the w^hole herd 
of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, 
and (apothnesko) perished in the w^aters." And it never 
means anything different when apphed to men. Rom. 
2 : 12, " As many therefore, as have sinned without law, 
shall also {apolountai) perish^ without (being judged by) ' 
law : and as many as have sinned under law^, shall be 
judged by law." Although there may be a difference in 
the meaning and in the intensity of the meaning, of the 
Hebrew and Greek w^ords translated perish, yet w^e shall 
see that the very mildest of them import the destruction 
of the living being; and but for the resurrection such 
destruction w^ould be total. And w^hen it is said, Isa. 
57 : 1, " The righteous perisheth ; and no man layeth it 
to heart"; and Ecc. 7: 15, "There is a just man that 
perisheth in his righteousness" ; it implies a total depri- 
vation of life; and Paul tells us, 1 Cor. 15 : 16-18, '*If 
the dead rise not.. ..then they also who have fallen asleep 
in Christ have (apolonto) perished "/ are for ever depri- 
ved of all being. While this proves that the word perish 
does imply destruction of being, it being thus applied to 
the righteous, proves likewise that perish does not mean 
preservation of life in hell ; for to Ecc. 7 : 15, it is added, 
" And there is a wicked man that prolongeth his life in 
his wickedness," which is opposed to the righteous w^hoby 
losing his life, '•'- perisheth?'^ John 10: 28, " I give unto 
(my sheep) eternal life ; and they shall (pie ajiohntai eis 
ton aiona) not perish in the age." Here again to perish 
is opposed to eternal life, consequently it cannot mean 
eternal life in torments. Moreover Christ intimates that 
his sheep do perish in death till the introduction of the 
age or reign of Christ on earth, on the throne of his fa- 
ther David. 

John 3 : 15, 16, " That whosoever believeth in him 
should not (apoletai) perish, but have eternal life." But 


if the wicked have eternal life in misery, tirev'k)© will 

never perish, and there is no contrast. ^^1^* • 7 i"- i'^'S '^ ' 

Acts 8 : 20, " But Peter said unto him, ThyS^te^tg^T '^ ^^- 
{apoleian) perish with thee, because thou hast thoughU 
that the gift of God may be purchased with money." 
Here it is intimated that money and the wicked will 
perish ahke. If money can Uve and endure eternal 
misery, the language of Peter might have been twisted 
so as to read that Simon should not literally perish — ^but 
that Simon and his money should alike live and suffer 
together ^'eternal torments" ! ! 

We give twenty other texts where the reader may 
look for the meaning of the word perish. Num. 24 : 20, 
24 ; Deut. 8 : 19 ; Jud. 5:31; Job 4 : 9, 20 ; 20 : 7 ; Ps. 
2: 12; 9: 3; 10 : 16 ; 37 : 20 ; 68 : 2; 83 : 17 ; 112: 
10; Is. 41 : 11 ; Lu. 13:5; Acts 13 : 41 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 18; 
8:11; 15: 18; and 2 Pet. 2: 12. 

We shall give a few quotations explanatory of the 
original words translated perish. SopJwh means to come 
to an end. 

1 Sam. 26 : 9, David said to Saul, " Destroy him not 
....The Lord shall smite him ; or his day shall come to 
die ; or he shall descend into battle and (soplioh) come to 
an endy But if the '^ immortal soul" of Saul lives, then 
certainly he has neither perished nor come to an end. So 
in 1 Sam. 27 : 1. 

Another word translated perish is gova^ to waste 
away, to decay. Josh. 22 : 20, And Achan (" gova^) 
wasted away not alone in his iniquity." Job 34 : 14, "If 
God set his heart upon man, if he gather unto himself 
his ruah^ spirit, and his nesme^ breath ; all flesh shall 
{gova^ decay together, and man shall turn again unto 
dust." If the man decays and turns to dust again, what 
is left but the spirit of the breath of Hves which is not a 
conscious thing, and which God has gathered into the 
great reservoir of all animal hfe ? Job 36 : 12, " But if 
they obey not, they shall (gova) waste away by the sword, 
and they shall die without knowledge." 

A word implying the most complete destruction, 
translated perish , is shomad^ to annihilate. Ps. 83 : 9, 
10, " Do unto them as unto....Jabin, at the brook Kis- 
hon : who (shomad) were annihilated at Endor : they 
became as dung for the earth." As living beings, they 


were put out of existence. Such language could not ap- 
ply to such as had * immortal souls' ; but as it does ap- 
ply to those that were annihilated at Endor, it proves 
that they had no such Pagan appendages. 

Other strong words translated perish, are adai ouvaid^ 
utter destruction. Num. 24 : 19, 20, " Out of Jacob 
shall come he (Christ) that shall have dominion." And 
w^hen Balaam " looked on Amalek, he took up his para- 
ble, and said, Amalek was the first of the nations, but 
his latter end shall be {adai ouvaid) utter destruction for 
ever." 23 v, *' And he took up his parable, and said, 
Alas, who shall live when God doeth this ! And ships 
shall come from Chittim, and shall afflict Asshur, and 
shall afflict Eber, and he also shall be [adai ouvaid) utter 
destruction f 07' every As this is a prophecy to take 
place under the judicial reign of Christ, it must imply 
the final disposition of these nations — they will be ut- 
terly exterminated. Thus we see that many of the He- 
brew w^ords are much more forcible than the English 
word perish. 

We turn to the N. T. Kataphtheiro, Phtheiro 
means to corrupt, and kata renders the word more in- 
tensive. 2 Pet. 2:12, '' But these as natural brute 
beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of 
the things that they understand not ; and shall utterly 
perish in their own corruption." This is a terrible de- 
nunciation against false teachers ; like the beasts made 
for no other purpose but to corrupt ; these like them 
shall corrupt in the utter corruption of their own nature. 
The manner of their perishing is hke that of beasts ; as 
beasts were not made for eternal torments but for 
slaughter and corruption, so are these. The simple 
form of the word is applied to beasts, and both the sim- 
ple and intensive to these men. 

Apolonto^ destroyed. Jude 11 v, ^' Wo is to them ; 
for they have gone in the way of Cain, and have run far 
in the error of Balaam's hire, and have (apulonto) perish- 
ed in the rebellion of Korah." We refer farther to 2 
Cor. 2:15, 16; Mat. 18:14; Luke 13:3; Acts 8 : 
20; Ps. 73:29; 92:9; Prov. 12:9; Deut. 8:19; 
Judges 5:31; Job 4 : 9, 20 ; 20 : 7 ; Ps. 2 : 12 ; 9 : 3 ; 
10:16; 37:20; 68:2; 83:1; 112:10; Isa. 41 : 11 ; 
Acts 13:41; 1 Cor. 1:18; 8:11; 15: 18. Thes(3 


thirty-two texts declare that the wicked shall perish ; 
and perish always implies death. 


To destroy means to demolish, to ruin ; to annihilate ; 
to bring to nought ; to kill ; to extirpate ; to put an end 
to. And the Bible meaning is even more intensive. 
The same words are sometimes translated destroy or 
perish. But the meaning will be obvious from the pas- 
sages we shall quote. There are thirty- eight different 
Hebrew words rendered destroy. One of the chief of 
these is tsoynath, to annihilate. 

2 Sam. 22 : 41 , " Thou hast also given me the necks of 
mine enemies, that I might (tsamath) annihilate those 
that hate me." This verse is again repealed, Ps. 18 : 40. 
Ps. 69 : 4, ^' They that would (tsomath) annihilate me, 
being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty." Ps. 101 : 
8, *' I will earlv tsomath {annihilate) all the wicked of 
the land." Ps. 73 : 27, " For, lo, they that are far from 
thee shall perish : thou hast {tsomath) annihilated all 
them that go a whoring from thee." There is no stronger 
word that we know of to describe the utter destruction 
of the being of the wicked. 

Prov. 15 : 25, " The Lord will {nosakh,) extirpate the 
house (or family) of the proud." Ps. 52 : 5, " God shall 
likewise destroy thee for ever ; he shall take thee away, 
and pluck thee out of thy dwelling place, and root thee 
out of the land of the living^ Selah." Then a destroyed 
person cannot be a living one. 

From these examples there can be no difficulty in un- 
derstanding the Bible definition of destroy and destruc- 
tion : they imply the deprivatioa of life and being. Mat. 
2 : 13, " For Herod will seek the young child to destroy 
him." Ps. 92 : 7, " When the wicked spring as the 
grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish ; 
it is that they shall be destroyed for ever^ Ps. 145 : 20, 
" The Lord preserveth ail them that love him : but all 
the wicked will he destroy." Destruction, when ap- 
plied to men, always means the deprivation of life, and is 
the very opposite of preservation in life. The difference 
of meaning when applied to men generally, including the 
righteous and the wicked is, the destruction does not 


prevent a resurrection to life by Almighty power ; but 
when apphed to the wicked, as such, it always implies 
thai they are or shall continue destroyed, they are " de 
stroyed for ever." Prov. 13 : 13, *' Whoso despiseththe 
word shall be destroyed.'^ Prov. 29 : 1, ^' He that, being 
often reproved, hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be 
destroyed, and that without remedy." The remedy for 
the death and destruction of the righteous is found in the 
resurrection, making the dominion of death but tempo- 
rary. Prov. 6 : 32, ^' Whoso committeth 
stroyeth his own soul" ^ his own conscious existence. A 
soul cannot exist and remain destroyed at the same time. 
Mat. 10 : 28, " Fear liim who is able to destroy both soul 
and body (both life and being,) in Gehenna." Then a 
destroyed soul, or person, cannot be living in any sense. 
Lev. 23 : 28, " And ye shall do no work in that same day; 
^*** whatsoever soul it be that doeth any work in that 
same day, the same soul will I destroy from among the 
people." Mark, God is able to destroy a soul, or being, 
and he declares that he will destroy such as continue to 
offend him. If a soul is kept alive eternally in torments 
it is not destroyed in any sense. This is so obvious that 
those who believe in eternal torments say it is something 
else that is destroyed, such as glory and happiness. But 
this is a denial of the plain letter of Scripture. James 
(4: 12,) sa3^s, '' There is one Lawgiver, who is able to 
save and destroy." If it be said that God's being able 
to destroy both life and being does not prove that he will 
do it, then neither does our quotation prove that God 
will either save or destroy. We affirm that God cannot 
destroy a person without destroying his soul, his con- 
scious being ; the contrary is a manifest contradiction. 
1 Cor. 3 : 17, " If any man defile the temple of God, him 
shall God destroy." Eev. 11 : 18, ^' Thy wrath is come, 
and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, 
and that thou shouldest.... destroy them which destroy 
the earth." 

See also Deut. 7:10; Job 34 : 25 ; Ps' 5 : 6, 10 ; 101 : 
8; Prov. 1:32; 11:3; 13:20; Isa. 13:9; 42:14; 
Ps. 143 : 12 ; 144 : 6 ; Mat. 21 : 13 ; Mark 12:9: Luke 
20 : 16. Here are thirty texts that state that all the 
wicked will God destroy, and not the least hint in any 
place, that they shall be preserved alive in endless misery. 


Nay, tliB Scriptures say, Job 36: 6, God " preserveth 
»ot the life of tho wicked." Acts 3 : 20, " For Moses 
truly said unto the fathers, A pix)phet «hall th-e Lord 
your God raise up lanto you of your brethren, like un- 
to me ; him shall y-e hear in all things whatsoever he 
shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every 
{psuche) soul, which will not hear that prophet, {exolo- 
threuthesetai ek ton laou) shall be utterly exterminated 
out of, or out from among, the people," Reader, examine 
the language, and believe the *^ souW^ that reject Christ 
will be " utterly extermin^at^d." If these exceedingly 
emphatic expressions do not teach the utter annihilation 
of the being of the wicked ; we ask, How can any lan- 
.^uage possibly teach it I 

a>tE:sTRiK;TioN shall <x)ME upon the wicked. 

Destruction, though we give it a separate place, signi- 
€es the a<5t of destroying, and has the same general mean- 
ing as destroy:; but Webster gives 'eternal death,' as 
one of its meanings. Thoiigb tbe w^ords eternal death, 
do not occur in the Scriptures, yet death, not to be fol- 
lowed by a resurrection, is eternal death ; and the simple 
term expresses ail that the compound term does. The 
persons exposed thei^unto become extinct and continue 
icxtinct. The idea in the Scriptures is expressed nega- 
tively, ^' They shall not see life." But the JBible will ex- 
plain the term dostruction, 2 Chron. 22: 4, Ahaziah 
■^^ did evil in th« sigbt of th^ Lord like the house of Ahab \ 
for they were his counsellors, after tho death of his fa- 
ther, to hi« destruction^^ ; and the 9 v. records the man- 
ner of his destruction, he was slain by Jehu. So Est. 8 : 
€, " For how can I -endTire to see the destruction of my 
kindred." The decree had gone forth ^' to destroy, to 
kill, and to cause to perish ;^' and this Esther calls de- 
struction. Job says, 31 : 23, ^' Destruction from God was 
^ terror to me." Observe, Job does not say that endless 
misery ^was a terror to bim, but simply destruction. — 
Then the fear of the destruction of being was the restraint 
in those days. Ps. 73 : 17-19^ The Psalmist says of the 
wicked, " I went into the sanctuary of God ; then under- 
stood I their end ; (the last of them). Surely thou didst 
«et them in slippery places : thou castest them down into 


destruction. They are utterly consumed with terrorsv^ 
Destruction puts an end to them- ; and such was the des 
truction that was a terror to Job. Pro, 21 : 15, " Destruc- 
tion shall be to the workers of iniquity." Isa. 1 : 28, 
*' And the destruction of the transgressors and of the 
sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord 
&hall be consumed.'^ Isa. 10: 25, God speaking to hi? 
people of the Assyrians,, says, " For yet a very little 
while, and the indignation shall cease, and mine anger m 
their destruction." The anger of God ceases when the 
wicked are destroyed, for there is nothing left of them to 
be angry with. The prophet prays for those that ridi- 
culed the word of the Lord, that God woald " bring up- 
on them the day of evil, and destroy them with a double 
destruction^ Jer. 17 : 18. " Destruction unto them! be 
cause they have transgressed against me." Hos. 7 : 13, 
Such is the general tenor of the O. T. 

The N. T. likewise testifies that the destruction of the 
wicked puts an end to their existence. Mat. 7: 13,, 
*' Wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth 
to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat."" 
Phil. 3 : 19„ " They are the er^mies of the cross of Christ : 
whose end is destruction.'^ But eternal torments caB 
have no end and no destruction. I Pet. 2:1, "There 
shall be false teachers among you, who..,.bring upon 
themselves swift destruction." 1 These. 5 : 3,. " The day 
of the Lord so comet h as a thief in the night. For when 
they shall say, Peace and safety ; then sudden destruc- 
tion cometh upon them." 2 Thess. 1 : 7-9, God shall 
recompense " to you who are troubled, rest with us,, 
when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heav^i with 
his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on 
them that know not God, and that obey not the gospe! 
of our Lord Jesus Christ : who shall be punished with 
everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and 
from the glory of his power. '^ It might be asked, Can 
the wicked exist when destroyed, and exist too where 
God has neither presence nor power ? See also Deut. 
32:24; Job 18: 12; Ps. 2:9; 35:8;^ 37:9,22,38; 
94:23: 1Q1:5,8; 143:12; Pro. 1:26,27; 2:22,' 
10:14,29; 13:3; Isa. 13:6, 7; 59: 7 ; Jer. 17: 15 ,' 
Eom. 3:16; 9 : 22 ; 11 : 22 ; I Tim. 6 : 9. Here are 
forty texts that say the wicked will be destroyed ; and 


intimating, with a destruction that will bring their exis- 
tence to an end. Alas ! for the unhappy critic that shall 
endeavor to make these texts compatible with the ever- 
lasting conscious existence of the wicked I 


The word devour, to eat up, when applied to the 
wicked, imphes their total consumption and annihilation. 
Lev. 10: 2, "There went out fire from the Lord, and 
devoured them, and they died before the Lord." Jer. 
2 : 30, " Your own sword hath devoured your prophets, 
like a destroying lion." Devour here imphes death, and 
destruction by fire or sword. Ps. 21 : 8, 9, " Thine hand 
shall find out all thine enemies. Thou shalt make them 
as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger : the Lord shall 
swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour 
them." Isa. 10: 16, "Therefore shall the Lord, the 
Lord of hosts, send among his fat ones leanness ; and 
under his glory he shall kindle a burning like the burning 
of a fire. And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and 
his Holy One for aflame : and it shall burn and devour 
his thorns and his briers (the wicked) in one day ; and 
shall consume the glory of his forest, and of his fruitful 
field, both soul and body^ (life and being,) and they shall 
be as when a standard bearer {koloh) is consumed." 
Isa. 26 : 11, " Yea the fire of thine enemies shall devour 
them." Isa. 33: 11, "Ye shall conceive chaff, ye shall 
bring forth stubble : yuur breath as fire shall devour you. 
And the people shall be as the burnings of lime ; as 
thorns cut up shall they be burned in the fire." 14 v, 
" The sinners in Zion are afraid ; fearfulness hath sur- 
prised the hypocrites. Who among . us shall dwell (or 
live) with the devouring fire? Who among us shall 
dwell (or live) with everlasting burnings ?" Says Paul, 
" How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation ?" 
All these questions imply the impossibility of escape, for 
it is impossible for the sinner to escape punishment ; and 
equally impossible for him to dwell (or live) in a devour- 
ing or everlasting fire without being consumed. Can a 
devouring fire fail to devour its fuel ? If it devours, it 
must consume the wicked. Everlasting, in this place, 
means lasting till the fuel be entirely consumed. Heb. 


10 : 27, There remaineth to the wicked, " A certain fear- 
ful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which 
shall devour the adversaries." Nahum 1:8," Darkness 
shall pursue his enemies. What do ye imagine against 
the Lord ? he will make an utter end : affliction shall 
not rise up a second time. For while they be folden to- 
gether as thorns, and while they are drunken as drunk- 
ards, they shall be devoured as stubble fully dry." Eev. 
20 : 9, " A fire came down from God out of heaven and 
devoured them." See also Psa 50 : 9 ; 76 : 7 ; Jer. 5 : 
14. Here are eleven times that the word devour is ap- 
plied to the end of the wicked. After sinners are de- 
voured, we see not how even God himself could inflict 
more punishment upon them without raising them again 
to life ; but such sure work will God make with sinners 
that it will not be necessary to afflict them a second 


Consume, in its apphcation to the wicked, implies to 
waste away ; to cause to pass away ; to bring to utter 
ruin ; to exterminate ; to burn up. But we will see its 
Bible exposition. In the O. T. it is koloh^ to consume, 
finish, come to an end. Ex. 15 : 7, " Thou sentest forth 
thy wrath, which consumed them as stubble." Here 
Pharaoh and his host were consumed by being drowned 
in the sea. Num. 17: 13, "Whoso cometh**near**the 
tabernacle.... shall die : shall be consumed with dying." 
Ps. 71 : 13, " Let them be confounded and consumed 
that are adversaries to my soul." Isa. 1 : 28, " The de- 
struction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be 
together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be con- 
sumed." Isa. 5 : 24, " As the fire devoureth the stubble, 
and the flame consumeth the chaff", so their root shall be 
as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust ; 
because they have cast away the law of the Lord." 
Zep. 1 : 2, " I will utterly consume all things from off 
the land, saith the Lord, I will consum^e man and beast ; 
I will consume the fowls of the heaven, and the fishes of 
the sea, and the stumbhng-blocks with the wicked ; and 
I will cut off* man from off the land, saith the Lord." 
Isa. 47 : 14, " Behold they (the astrologers,) shall be as 


stubble ; the fire shall burn them ; tney shall not deliver 
their souls (original and margin,) from the power of the 
flame." Their souls then being under the power of the 
flame, will surely be consumed. But their souls, means 
themselves. Granted. They will be utterly consumed 
soul and being. See also, Deut. 4 : 24 ; 1 Sam. 22 : 25 : 
Job 4 : 8, 9; 15 : 34 ; 20 : 26 ; Ps. 75 : 3 ; Isa. 10 : 22, 23 
16 : 4 ; 28 : 22 ; 29 : 20 ; 50 : 9. 

Here are twenty times that the Bible plainly declares 
the wicked shall be consumed in destruction. This can- 
not be made compatible with continued existence in mis- 
ery. But alas, alas, it has been prophecied that in the 
last days, those who have the form of godliness, shall 
turn from the truth unto fables, and will not endure 
sound doctrine, but having itching ears, they will heap 
to themselves such teachers as will twist the Bible into 
a conformity with their contradictory creeds. See 2 Tim. 
c. 3 and 4. 


That literal fire will be used as an instrument in the 
punishment of the wicked in the judgment to take place 
when Christ shall return from heaven, is a plain matter 
of record ; and though the language of John in describ- 
ing the destruction of the wicked, at the end of the one 
thousand years, is highly figurative and symbolical, yet 
we may infer that literal fire will then be used ; perhaps 
the same fire that will dissolve the elements of the hea- 
vens, or the atmospheres, prior to the everlasting renova- 
tion of the heavens and the earth. Indeed in 2 Pet. 3 : 
7-13, the destruction of the wicked, and the destruction 
of the present arrangement that exists in the heavens, or 
atmospheres, and the earth, are coupled together as 
though the same fire would be used in the accompHsh- 
ment of both. " But the heavens and the earth, which 
are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved 
unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of 
ungodly men." The similitudes and examples of the des- 
truction of the wicked mostly refer to the instrumentality 
of fire. Mat. 13 : 30, " Let both (the tares and the wheat,) 
grow together until the harvest ; andin the time of harvest, 
I will say to the reapers, First gather the tares, and make 


them into bundles for burning ; then carry the wheat 
into my barn." 

In the exposition of this parable, Christ declared that 
" The field is the world : the gpod seed are the sons of 
the kingdom ; and the tares are the sons of the evil one. 
The enemy who sowed them is the devil : the harvest is 
the conclusion of this age; and the reapers are the an- 
gels. As, therefore, the tares are gathered and burned, 
so shall it be at the conclusion of this age. The Son of 
man will send his angels, who shall gather out of his 
kingdom all seducers and iniquitous persons, and throw 
them into the burning furnace : weeping and gnashing of 
teeth shall be there." As the tares must be burned to 
ashes, so must the sinners be burned to ashes : and as 
there would be no tares left after being subjected to the 
continued action of fire : so there will be no sinners left ; 
they will be totally destroyed in like manner. 

The cities of Sodom and Gomorrha are set forth as 
an example, or pattern, of the manner in which the wick- 
ed will be burned or destroyed. Gen. 19 : 24, " Then 
the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrha brim- 
stone and fire out of heaven.'^'' Examine 2 Pet. 2 : 6, and 
Jude 6, 7, '^ Also the angels who kept not their own 
office.... he hath reserved in everlasting chains, under 
darkness, unto the judgment of the great day. As So- 
dom and Gomorrha,.... are set forth an example, having 
undergone the punishment of an eternal fire. In like 
manner, indeed, these also shall be punished." Mark, 
the cities of the plain, have already suffered the punish- 
ment of " eternal fire" ; it has consumed them and their 
inhabitants ; and this is the pattern given of the destruc- 
tion of the wicked. As nothing that is concealed can be 
an example to us, so the example must consist in their 
outward, visible, total destruction. As the Sodomites 
were punished judicially, the 0. T. Scriptures afford us 
no proof that they will ever have a resurrection. Rom. 
2 : 12, " As many, therefore, as have sinned without law, 
shall also perish without being judged by law." 

2 Sam. 23 : 6, 7, " But the sons of Behal (the worth- 
less,) shall be all of them as thorns thrust away.... and 
they shall be utterly burned with fire in the same place." 
Isa. 23 : 11, 12, " Ye shall conceive chaff, ye shall bring 
forth stubble : your breath, as fire, shall devour you, and 


fhe people shall be as the burnings of lime : as thorns 
cut up shall they be burned in the fire." See also Psa, 
11:6; 83:14,15; 140: It); Isa, 24:6; 66:15,16; 
Mat. 7 : 19 ; John 15:6. Here are fourteen texts that 
plainly declare that the wjcted shall be burned with fire. 
The siraihtudes that are used, such as thorns, briers, 
tares, stubble, trees, and chaff, being all combustible ar- 
ticles, and when representing the wicked, are consumed 
by fire, and leave nothing but ashjes, so will the wicked 
ultimately be; "^^ Y-e (the righteous) shall tread down the 
wicked ; for they shall be cishes under the soles of your 
feet in the day that I shall do this ; saith the Lord of 
hosts." These figures can never be reconciled with the 
•eternal conscioias existence of the wicked. If such a doc- 
trine were true^ no figures could be more inappropriate 
to express it ; but as the Scriptures uniformly testify of 
the total destruction of the wholebeing of the wicked, so no 
figures could be more appropriately chosen to represent 
the extermination of their entire being. To afiirmthat the 
wicked will live for evei' in misery, when God says they 
shall be burned up like stubble fully dry, is plainly to 
contradict God, We have been taught that G-od means 
what he says, and says what he means ; and God says, 
*^' In that day when I make up my jewels.. ..then shall ye 
discern between the righteous and the wicked.... For, be- 
hold the day cometh that shall burn as an oven ; and all 
the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble : 
and the day that eometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord 
of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch,... 
And ye shall tread down the wicked ; for they shall be 
ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do 
this, saith the Lord of hosts.^ Mai. 4 This declaration of 
the Almighty we are bound to believe. But cavilerBhave 
tried to weaken the effect of this passage, by stating that 
the word ' up' is not in the original ; but it is contained 
in the word boar, to burn up. There are twenty-two 
words that are translated burn ; this is the strongest of 
the whole, and implies a flame that consumes. The 
same word boar is the original in all the passages where 
the words ' burnt up'' occur in the English version. 

The word may be found tr. bur?ied, Ex. 3 : 2 ; Deut. 
4 : 1 1 ; 9 : 15 ; Est. 1:12; Ps. 39 : 3 ; Isa. 42 : 25 ; it 
is translated bur?2X in Num. 11: 1^ 3 ^ 2 Chron. 28 : 3. It 

248 BiBLi: vs, TRADrrroN. 

is tr. burUy joined with JtrSj in Deut. 5 : 23 ; Ps. 79 : 5 ; 
89 : 46 ; Isa. 47 : 14 ; Jer. 4:4. In Jer. 21 : 10, the 
word is sorap^j to burn, but in the 12; v. it is^ boar ; Ez. 
5 : 2y and translated bum, it occurs, Isa. 1:31; 10: 17 ; 
40 : 16 ; 44 : 15 ; Jer. 7 : 20 ; Nah. 2 : 13 ; Mai. 4 : 1.— 
Let the reader examine all these passages, and he will 
be convinced that the word implies the thorough con- 
sumption of all the things to which it is applied. 

But, continues the objector, " The fire that burns up 
the wicked is called ' eternal fire,* and their punishment 
is called 'eternal damnation.' We reply, 1. That it is 
called a consuming fire and a devouring fire ; and if it 
consumes and devours it must utterfy destroy the wicked'^ 

2. Supposing that the word aidnas^ translated ' eternal^ 
meant what the English word imports, without begin- 
ning and without end — which it certainly does not, and 
which the reader will see when we discuss the meaning- 
of this word — even when taken in the broadest sense 
contended for, it can imply no more than that the instru- 
ment of destruction is everlasting. To say that a fire 
will continue to burn what it does not consume, is a 
solecism in language. If pure gold is indestructible in 
fire, then it cannot be burned ; if the wicked are indes- 
tructible, they can neither be burned nor injured by fire* 

3. Everlasting fire, or fire lasting till it ha& utterly con- 
sumed its fuel, is an appropriate emblem of total and 
everlasting destruction. If the fire were not to last thus 
long, some vestiges of the wicked, such as bones, which 
are the most indestructible, might possibly remain. And 

4. "We reply, that in Heb> 6 : 2, we read of " eternal 
judgment," and this and * eternal fire, ^ cmly mean that 
in both cases, it will be final, the results will be everlast- 
ing ; the wicked will continue burned up ; they wil] 
never rise again ; they will be consumed, annihilated^ 
exterminated ; they will remain under the power af 
death for ever ; and as men, they will be as though they 
had never been. It is frivolous to tell us that the ele- 
mentary principles will remain ; we know that, but we 
know too that as living men or beings they will not be^ 
Ashes and gases are not conscious beings, and to such 
things the wicked will be reduced. 



We shall quote a few other passages that, if possible, 
still more emphatically declare the wicked will be totally 
blotted out of existence. Ps. 37 : 20, " The wicked shall 
perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as ih^fat 
of lambs : they shall consume ; into smoke shall they 
consume away!^^ 9 v, " For evil doers shall be cut off,.,. 
For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be : yea, 
thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not 
^." If the place of the wicked is to be in hell, and they 
are to be there in a conscious state, then they will neither 
be " cut off" nor " consumed," nor " perish," but will be 
alive in hell, and David has testified falsely concerning 
them. But as .David has truly testified, and is in perfect 
agreement with the whole tenor of the word of God, 
then are modern teachers, who preach to us of * eternal 
torments,' found false witnesses before God. Five times 
in this Psalm are the wicked said to be " cut off." 34 
V, " Wait on the Lord, and keep his way, and he shall 
exalt thee to inherit the land, (the land promised to 
Abraham and his seed, Christ) : when the wicked are cut 
off, thou shalt see it. I have seen the wicked in great 
power, ....yet he passed away^ and lo, he was not ; yea I 
sought him, but he could not be found." 38 v, " The 
transgressors shall he{shomad) an?iihilated together : the 
end of the wicked shall be cut off." If an " immortal 
isoul" were left, then this language cannot be true. Com- 
pare all this with Mai. 4 : 1-3, where he describes the 
wicked as being " burned up root and branch." If the 
soul be either a root, or branch, or part, or whole of the 
wicked, it is utterly consumed with him. 

Ezekiel (26 : 18,) prophesies of the king of Tyre, be- 
cause of the multitude of his iniquities; " Therefore will 
I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall de- 
vour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth 
in the sight of all them that behold thee.... Thou shalt be 
a terror, and neve?' shalt thou be any more^ Mat. 3 : 
12 ; Luke 3:17. *' His winnowing shovel is in his hand ; 
and he will thoroughly cleanse his grain ; he will gather 
his wheat into the granary, and consume the chaff in 
unquenchable fire." Mark, the unquenchable fire burns 


up, or consumes the chaff, the wicked ; and neither 
chaff nor the wicked, can exist after they are burned up, 
burned ujy root and branch. Isa. 51:8, " For the moth 
shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall 
eat them hke wool." "Worms and unquenchable fire 
alike consume, the fire can not be quenched till it has 
thoroughly performed its office ; when the carcase is en- 
tirely consumed, the fire will of course go out, though it 
cannot be put out while the fuel lasts. Paul, in Heb. 
1 2 : 29, calls God a consuming fire, not a tormenting 
fire, fire cannot torment without consuming. In Job 31 : 
12, '' It is a fire that consumeth to destruction ;" not a 
fire that preserveth to torment. Isa. 9 : 19, " Through 
the wrath of the Lord of hosts is the land darkened, and 
the people shall be dL^maakhesheth^ a devouring, or thing 
to be devoured, for the fire." The margin says meat, 
but the same word occurs Ez. 21 : 32, connected with 
the coming of him whose right it is to reign on the throne 
of David, and the judgments he will then execute. '^ I 
will pour out my indignation upon thee, I will blow 
against thee in the fire of my wrath, and deliver thee 
into the hand of brutish men, skillful to destroy. Thou 
shalt be for fuel {maaJdiesheth^ a thing to be devoured) for 
the fire ; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land ; thou 
shalt be no more reraembered : for I the Lord have 
spoken it." The same word occurs in Ez. 15:4, 6, 
where it is applied to the wood of the vine tree, and the 
wicked are compared with it, as fit only to be burned. — 
And God says, 5 v. '■'- Behold, when it was whole, it was 
fit for no work : how much less shall it be yet fit for any 
work when the fire hath devoured it and it is burned ?" 
But if the wicked have something in them that cannot 
be burned, such a thing as an " immortal soul," there 
would be no similitude ; that soul would yet be fit for 
something, if it were only for " eternal torment." 

Ps. 73 : 19, " How are they brought into desolation, 
as in a moment ! they are utterly consumed with terrors." 
2 Sam. 23 : 7, They'like thorns " shall be utterly burned 
with fire." 2 Pet. 2 : 12, They " shall utterly perish in 
their own corruption." Surely the soul does not escape 
when'the wicked are ^ utterl;^ burned,' ' utterly consum- 
ed,* when they ' utterly perish' ! ! Isa. 47 : 14, " Behold, 
they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them ; tbey 


shall not deliver their souls from the power of the flame." 
Isa. 10 : 17, 18, *' The Light of Israel (Christ) shall be for 
a fire, and his Holy One for a flame ; and it shall burn 
and devour his thorns and his briers in one day ; and 
shall consume the glory of the forest, and of his fruitful 
field, both soul and body?'^ That is, both flesh and be- 
ing. Both these texts declare that the soul is burned. 
To affirm that the soul is not burned up, is equal to say- 
ing that the man is not burned up. Yea, God will des- 
troy * both body and soul in Gehenna.' Mat 10 : 28. 
David prays, Ps. 7 : 9, ^' Oh let the wickedness of the 
wicked come to an end^ A prayer dictated by the Holy 
Spirit is equal to a declaration that the thing shall be. 
But the wickedness of the wicked will only end when 
they are destroyed. 

Were a theologian of these days to utter this idea he 
would be rebuked by his compeers with the declaration, 
that '* the wicked will increase in wickedness, and blas- 
pheme God to all eternity." But let us hear David 
again. Ps. 10; 15, " Break thou the arm (or power) of 
the wicked and the evil man : seiBk out his wickedness 
till thou find none. The Lord is King for ever and ever : 
the heathen are perished out of his land." When Christ 
has fully established his kingdom^ there will ba no wick- 
edness to be found. Why ? The TJniversahst tells us, 
because God will cleanse the wicked. The believer in 
eternal torments tells us flatly, * It is not so, the wicked 
will continue to blaspheme God in a helP of ' eternal tor- 
ment.^ But the Bible tells us,~Rev. 5 : 13, " And every 
creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under 
the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in 
them, were heard, saying. Blessing and honor, and glory 
and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, 
and unto the Lamb for ever and ever," All that are 
living at that time will praise the Lamb. But where 
are the wicked? Ps. 9:5," Thou hast rebuked the 
heathen, thou hast destroyed the wicked^ thou hast put 
out their name for ever and ever." Ps. 69 : 28. Their 
name has been blotted out of the book of the hving 
For says Job 36 : 6, " He preserveth not the life of the 
wickedy For God will not contend for ever neither will 
he be always wroth. Isa. 57 : 16. Ps. 37 : 10, " For yet 
a little while and the wicked shall not be." Isa. 41 : 12, 


*' Thou shalt seek them, and shalt not find them, even 
them that contended with thee : they that war against 
thee shall be as nothing, and as a thing of nought." See 
also Isa. 22 : 14 ; Ez. 35 : 5 ; and Isa. 10 : 25. " For yet 
a very little while, and the indignation shall cease^ and 
mine anger in their destruction." Thus the controversy 
between God and the wicked will end, the indignation of 
God will cease. The wicked will be utterly extermina- 
ted. Acts 8 : 22, ** Eor Moses truly said unto the fa- 
thers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto 
you of your brethren, like unto me ; him shall ye hear 
in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. — 
And it shall come to pass, that every (psuche) soul, 
which will not hear that prophet, [eooolothreuthese- 
tai ek tou laou,) shall be utterly exterminated out of, 
or out from among, the people." There will exist 
no wickedj for their very souls, or beings will be exter- 

Well might Jeremiah pray, (10 : 24,) " Lord, correct 
me, but with judgment ; not in thine anger, lest thou 
bring me to nothing." Isa. 41: 11, " Behold, all they 
that w^ere incensed against thee shall be ashamed and 
confounded : they shall be as nothing ; and they that 
strive with thee shall perish. Thou shalt seek them, and 
shalt not find them^ even them that contended with thee : 
they that war against thee shall be as nothing, and as a 
thing of nought." Can a soul brought to nothing, suf- 
fer ^ endless misery' ? Job 6 : 18, " The paths of their 
w^ay are turned aside ; they go to nothing and perish." 
Job .8 : 22, " The dwelling place of the wicked shall come 
to nought." Margin^ not be. So the wicked will have 
no place to exist in ; even God cannot find them, they 
wall have perished out of existence. 

Ps. 104 : 35, " Let the sinners be consumed out of the 
earth, and let the wicked be no more." The reader will 
remember, that " the earth has been given to the children 
of men" ; that the righteous are to be rewarded in the 
earth, and the wicked are to be punished in the earth. 

The invention of an immortal soul, has necessitated the 
invention of a place to put it in ; hence has arisen a fa- 
bled heaven " beyond the bounds of time and space," a 
hell in which to punish and torment the wicked for ever ; 
but in the Bible we find that to root a sinner out of tho 


earth, is made by a parallelism, equal to the destruction 
of his being. Ps. 59: 13, " Consume them in wrath, con- 
sume them, that they may not be^ Ps. 1 19 : 19, " Thou 
puttest away (or shovath^ thou causest to cease) all the 
wicked of the earth like {seegeem^ cinders or) dross." 
Ps. 9:5, " Thou hast rebuked the heathen, thou hast 
destroyed the wicked, thou hast put out their name for 
ever and ever." Prov. 10 : 25. " As the whirlwind pass- 
eth, so are the wicked no more : but the righteous are 
an everlasting foundation." 27 v, " The fear of the Lord 
prolongeth (or addeth) days : but the years of the wick- 
ed shall be shortened." But the duration of an ^ immor- 
tal' soul can neither be increased nor diminished. Prov. 
12:7," The wicked are overthrown and are not : but 
the house (or family) of the righteous shall stand." Ez. 
32 : 7, " When I shall (kovoh) extinguish thee, I will 
cover the heaven and make the stars thereof dark." 
Lam. 3 : 66, " Persecute and destroy them in anger from 
under the heavens of the Lord." Job 20 : 5-9, " The 
triumphing of the wicked is short.. ..He shall perish for 
ever like his own dung : they which have seen him shall 
say. Where is he ? He shall fly away as a dream, and 
shall not be found : yea, he shall be chased away as a 
vision of the night. The eye also which saw him shall 
see him no more ; neither shall his place any more behold 
him." Speaking of Babylon and of the Chaldeans, Isa. 
43 : 16, 17, says, " Thus saith the Lord.. ..who bringeth 
forth the chariot and horse, the army and the power ; 
they shall lie down together, they shall not rise : they 
are extinct, they are quenched as tow." We know not 
what language could more emphatically set forth the an- 
nihilation of the wicked than the foregoing. Nah. 1 : 9, 
" What do ye imagine against the Lord ? he will make 
an utter end : affliction shall not rise up the second time. 
For while they be folden as thorns, and while they are 
drunken as drunkards, they (his enemies) shall be de- 
voured as stubble fully dry." Amos 8 : 14, " They that 
swear by the sin of Samaria, and say, thy Grod, O Dan, 
liveth ; even they shall fall, and never rise up again." — 
Ob. 15-18. "For the day of the Lord is near.. ..For as 
ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the 
heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they 
shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they 


HAD NOT BEEN. Aiid the housG of Jacob shall be a fire, 
and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau 
for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour 
them ; and there shall not be any remaining of the house 
of Esau ; for the Lord hath spoken it." 

We have presented fifty texts that clearly prove the 
wicked will become extinct ; and in all two hundred and 
thirty plain declarations of the Holy Bible, that the 
wicked will be destroyed without remedy, body and soul, 
root and branch, all of them will become as nothing, they 
will have no existence. It is in vain to plead that some 
of these texts may apply to judgments that have already 
been executed ; it is obvious that they apply to the 
wicked as a class — and not to the righteous — and speak 
of the end of their existence. If the objector will under- 
take to prove from the Old Testament Scriptures that 
the wicked, who have had sentence passed upon them 
judicially, will be raised again, then these numerous pas- 
sages will only apply to a judicial sentence to be execu- 
ted upon them soon after their resurrection. Although 
the resurrection of the righteous is taught inferentially 
in the promise made to Abraham and in the promises of 
life, and in many clear cases, yet we know of no clear 
passage in the Old Testament that distinctly teaches that 
the heathen and those who have not heard the gospel, 
will be judged by a law of which they have not heard. 
Dan. 12: 2, does not teach it; ^^ And many of those 
that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, these to 
everlasting life, and those to reproach and everlasting 
abhorrence." This rather teaches the contrary. The 
word some has no corresponding word in Hebrew. Does 
a captious reader ask. Can the dead be held in everlast- 
ing abhorrence? We refer him to page fifty-three in . 
Judea Capta., " Vespasian made a present of a vast num- 
ber of the Jews, his own subjects, to Agrippa, with free 
leave to dispose of them as he pleased; but Agrippa, to 
his shame and everlasting disgrace^ sold these also into 
slavery." That celebrated writer. Sir Walter Scott, ia 
his history of Napoleon, speaks of his hero's conduct on 
one occasion thus : " To his shame and everlasting dis- 
grace be it spoken." 

The penalty of the law is death ; and this penalty God 
has so often threatened the transgressor, that it seemg 


needless to enumerate all the places where it may be 
found. This penalty must be inflicted upon the unfor- 
given sinner, or the word of God must fail. Perpetual 
life in extreme misery is not death, in any sense of the 
word. The subterfuge that the penalty includes eternal 
death, or spiritual death, or everlasting torments, and 
the death of the body merely, but not of the soul, will 
avail little ; for Christ did not suffer spiritual death, nor 
eternal death, nor everlasting death, nor everlasting tor- 
ments ; but he gave his hfe, his soul, his being, to ran- 
som his people from death — from unconsciousness. As 
death, the extinction of being, is threatened to man 
on the one hand, so life, the perpetuation of being, is 
promised to the faithful on the other. 

As the gospel covenant, entered into with Abraham, 
included the promise that God should emphatically be- 
come his God — as well as the everlasting inheritance of 
the land of Canaan in its renewed state — under the reign 
of his seed, Christ — and as, in conjunction with these 
promises Abraham was told that he should die in a good 
old age — and as Abraham could only inherit this land 
by a resurrection from the dead ; so the promise of the 
possession of this inheritance, was equivalent to the 
promise of everlasting life, and of a resurrection from the 
dead. So Abraham understood it, and so Christ inter- 
preted it. Compare Exo. 6 : 3, " I appeared unto Abra- 
ham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God 
Almighty, but by my name Jehovah (the fulfiller of the 
pt oniises) was I not known unto them. And I have also 
established my covenant tvith thern^ to give them the 
land of Canaan^ the land of their 'pilgrimage^ wherein 
they were strangers." But God made another covenant 
with Abraham as a token or pledge that he would ful- 
fill the first covenant ; for Abraham had said, " Whereby 
shall I know that I shall inherit it ?" (the land). God 
said. Gen. 15 : 13, " Know of surety that thy seed shall 
be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve 
them ; and they shall aflflict them four hundred years. . . 
but in the fourth generation they shall come hither again"; 
(into the land of Canaan). " God remembered his co- 
venant with Abraham," and God said, Exo. 6 : 8, " I 
will bring you unto the land, concerning the which I did 
swear to give it to Abraham^ to Isaac^ and to Jacoby 


(who had been dead four hundred years,) and I will give 
it you for a heritage : I am Jehovah" (the fuliiller of the 
promises). Now read Heb. 11:8, " By faith Abraham, 
when called to go out into the place which he was after- 
wards to receive as an inheritance, obeyed... .and journey- 
ed into the land of promise, as into a strange land, dwell- 
ing (only) in tents (not in substantial habitations, with) 
....the fellow heirs of the same promise ; for he looked 
for the city that hath foundations.... These all died in 
faith, not having received the promises^ but having seen 
them AFAR OFF, and embraced them, and having confes- 
sed that they were strangers and pilgrims in the land 
(that God had promised them). For they, who say such 
things, show that they are seeking their own country^ 
(in its heavenly state). Wherefore God is not ashamed 
of them to be called their God ; for he hath prepared for 
them a city ;" (the New Jerusalem, to be located upon 
Mount Zion, the identical spot now trodden under foot 
by the Gentiles, the Turks). Our Saviour, reasoning 
upon what is implied in these promises, argues, Luke 20 : 
37, because God is the God of Abraham, therefore 
Abraham must arise from the dead to inherit the land. 
Hence the promise of perpetually inheriting the land 
was equivalent to the promise of perpetual life ; and the 
non-inheritance of it was equal to perpetual death. Very 
many texts contain the promise of life and the threaten- 
ing of death, or the extinction of being, under the idea 
of the possession of this inheritance on the one hand, and 
the being driven out of it, or destroyed out of it, on the 


Ez. 18 : 20, " The soul that sinneth, it shall die^ 17 v, 
" He shall not die,'' 18 v, " He shall die.'' 21 v, " Have 
I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die ?" Eead 
many similar expressions throughout the chapter. Prov. 
15: 10, " He thathateth reproof shall die." Prov. 19: 
16, " He that despiseth my ways shall die." Ez. 33 : 8, 
The ^' wicked man shall die in his iniquity." See many 
examples in this chapter. Deut. 30 : 15, " See, I have 
set before you this day, life and good, death and evil." 
Jer. 21 : 8, " I have set before you the way oilife and 


the way of deaths Eom. 6 : 23, " The wages of sin is 
deaths 21 v, " The end of those things is deaths — 
Jam. 1 : 15, "Sin, when finished, bringeth forth death?'* 
" If ye beheve not that I am he, ye shall die in your ' 


The gospel originated in the benevolence of God, and 
its provisions were adapted to the* emergencies of the 
condition of man. Man being mortal, and not having 
access to the tree of hfe, in consequence of sin, became 
liable to suffering and death ; but Christ being offered a 
sacrifice for sins, has ransomed his people from death, by 
a promised resurrection from the dead at the coming of 
their deliverer to estabhsh his kingdom over the land 
promised to our fathers, to Abraham and his seed for 
ever. " God so loved the world, that he gave his only 
begotten Son, that whosoever beheveth in him should not 
perish but have everlasting life." " I am come," says 
Christ, '' that they might have life." The very object 
for which the gospel was written was to teach two great 
truths. John 20 : 31, " These are written that ye might 
beheve that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God ; 
and that believing ye might have life through his 
name." I John : 2 : 25, " And this is the promise that 
he hath promised us, (even) aionion life^ 4:9, " God 
sent his only begotten Son into the world, that w^e might 
live through him." 5 : 9, " This is the witness of God 
which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth 
on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that 
believeth not, makes God a liar ; because he beheveth 
not the testimony that God hath witnessed concerning 
his Son. And this is the testimony, that God hath given 
unto us {zoen aionion) the lije pertaining to the age {of 
the Messiah^) and this hfe is in his Son. He that hath 
the Son hath the life, (or this life; ten zoen^) and he 
that hath not the Son of God hath not the life^ 

In the Syriac version, all these passages occur; and 
in the place of the Greek words save^ salvation^ and Sa- 
vior^ appear the words live^ life^ and Life-giver, Indeed 
the Greek w^ord for life (zoe^ is from the same root as is 


the Syriac word for life, and the giving of life and salva- 
tion are made synonymous terms. Christ says, " I am 
the resurrection and the life" ; and Peter accused the 
Jews of killing the Author of JLife. 


Most of our readers have been taught that the terms 
life and death, mean eternal glory and happiness on the 
one hand, and endless misery in a hell of fire upon the 
other. IJpon what grounds must the literal meaning of 
the terms life and death be explained away ? Because, 
forsooth, theologians have assumed that man is immortal, 
and therefore, life, in the sense of conscious existence, 
cannot be the great offer of the Bible ; nor can literal 
death be the portion of '^ immortal souls." But we beg 
leave to demur, and demand the proof When Christ 
gave his life for the world. Did he give his eternal glory 
and happiness ? Will these tamperers with the word of 
the living God explain John 12 : 25, " He that loveth his 
life shall lose it ; and he that hateth his life in this world 
shall keep it unto life eternal" ? Did Christ teach that 
a man could have eternal glory and happiness in this 
world^ and hate it ? 

But this life is often contrasted with the life to be im- 
parted by Christ in such a manner that it cannot be 
made to mean eternal glory and happiness. " If in this 
life only we have hope in Christ we are of all men most 
miserable." If endless Hfe be the great promise of the 
gospel, how can man be immortal irrespective of the gos- 
pel ? How can God give eternal life to his servants 
only, if all men naturally possess it ? Apply the same 
principle of interpretation to the Bible generally, and the 
whole may be turned into foolishness. But he who be- 
lieves the Bible, receives it according to the obvious ac- 
ceptation of the words in which it is written, so far as he 
can understand the sense they were designed to convey. 

We will give a few examples of the terms in which 
endless life is promised, that behevers of God's word 
may have strong consolation, who have laid hold on the 
hope set before them in the g08i)el. 



Of all those passages that secure the endless life of the 
righteous, the negative forms of expression are the 
strongest and most expressive. Let the reader bear in 
mind that God hath promised Jesus life without end, and a 
kingdom without an end, and therefore, says Christ — 
" Because I hve ye shall live also." Luke 1 : 3*2, " He 
shall be called the Son of the Highest ; and the Lord 
God shall give unto him the throne of his father David : 
and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever ; and 
his kingdom [puk estai telos) shall be without an end.^"* 
Eom. 8 : 17, Christians are " heirs of God, d^ndi joint heirs 
with Christ," of this kingdom. Heb. 7 : 15, " After the 
similitude of Melchizedek there ariseth another priest, 
who is made, not according to the law of corporeal in- 
junctions, {alia kata dunamin zoes akata lutoa^ but ac- 
cording to the energy of an indissoluble life^ Heb. 6 : 
17, " Therefore God being abundantly wilhng to show 
to the heirs of the promise^ that his promising was irre- 
versible, bound it up in an oath ; so that by two things 
which change not^ and in which God cannot he, we, who 
have sought refuge in him, might have great consolation, 
and might hold fast the hope promised us ; which is to 
us as an anchor, that retaineth our soul, so that it swer- 
veth not ; and it entereth into that within the veil, whi- 
ther Jesus hath previously entered for us, and hath be- 
come a priest for ages, after the likeness of Melchize- 

Mat. 6 : 20 ; Luke 12 : 32, " Fear not, httle flock ; for 
it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the king- 
dom." " Sell what ye have and give alms ; provide 
yourselves bags that wax not old, a treasure in the hea- 
vens that faileth not : where no thief approacheth, 
neither moth corruptethy Heb. 10: 34, " Ye cheerfully 
endured the plundering of your goods, knowing that in 
heaven ye had a more enduring substance." God has 
said, Heb. 13 : 5, " I will never leave thee^ no, no, I will 
never forsake thee^ Heb. 12 : 28, " Wherefore we re- 
ceiving a kingdom that cannot be moved^ let us.... serve 
God acceptably." 1 Pet. 1:3, " Blessed be the God 


and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to 
his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a hope of 
life^ by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 
to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that 
fadeth not away^ reserved in the heaven for you that are 
kept by the power of God, through faith, unto a salva- 
tion which is ready to be revealed in the last time," (of 
this age). Luke 20 : 35, " The children of this age mar- 
ry and are given in marriage ; but those who shall be 
esteemed worthy to possess that age, and the resurrec- 
tion out from among the dead, neither marry, nor are 
given in marriage ; nor can they die any more ; for they 
will be like angels^ and be the sons of God^ being the 
sons of the resurrection^ 1 Pet. 5:4," When the chief 
Shepherd slwdl appear^ ye shall receive a crown of glory 
\k\2X fadeth not atvo.yy John 10 : 27, " My sheep, as 1 
told you, obey my voice ; I know them, and they follow 
me. Besides, I give them life throughout the age ; and 
they shall never perish^ neither shall any one wrest them 
out of my hands." John 11 : 25, " I am the resurrection 
and the hfe ; he that beheveth in me, though he were 
dead, yet shall he live, and whosoever hveth and be- 
lieveth in me, shall not die (eis ton aionn) at the age." — 
Keader ! " BeHevest thou this ?" John 6 : 50, " This is 
the bread that cometh down from heaven, so that any 
one may eat thereof and not die^ 

But there are still stronger expressions than any that 
we have yet quoted. The very words that indicate the 
endless existence of God are applied to the resurrected 
saints. The terms without corruptibility and without 
death, are appUed to the nature that the righteous will 
have conferred upon them when they shall arise from 
the dead. Aj)hthartos^ and aphtharsia^ without corrup- 
tion, are applied to denote the unending nature of God 
in Kom. 1 : 23 ; 1 Tim. 1 : 17 ; and to the resurrected 
saints in Eom. 2:7; 1 Cor. 15 : 42, 50, 52, 53, 54; 2 
Tim. 1 : 10; 1 Pet. 1 : 4, 23. Athanasia^v^\\ho\xi death, 
or deathlessness, is applied to God, 1 Tim. 6:16, and to 
the resurrected saints in 1 Cor. 15 : 53, 54 ; 9 : 21 ; Isa. 
45 • 17, 18. 

But how shall we adequately express the force of the 
sublime language of Paul in 2 Cor. 4:7,'' For our hght 
afflictions which quickly pass away, prepareth us for, 


{Jcath huperbolen eis huperholen aionion haros doxes hater- 
gazetai liemin^) a burden of glory superabundantly 
transcending the aionion or age-lasting glory." Here is 
superabundance piled upon superabundance of glory be- 
yond aionion. 

Whatever period therefore aionion may express, it 
cannot possibly be put in comparison with the duration 
of the righteous. Glory be to God. 

Hitherto we have omitted those texts that contain 
aionion^ often translated ' eternal' and * everlasting,' be- 
cause we question the propriety of such translation. — 
We see how little we should lose if every promise bound- 
ed by aionion were stricken from the book of God. We 
still should have the everlasting inheritance guaranteed 
and secured by the most positive and undoubted terms. 
In like manner is the doom of the wicked irreversibly 
fixed ; not by the equivocal application of the word 
aionion to their fate ; but by such negative terms as 
* shall not see life ;' and the equally plain and positive 
expressions we have set forth in the preceding pages. 




Before we can give a clear exposition of a few texts, and 
meet the objections of the Universalists on the one hand, 
and the reputed orthodox on the other, we shall investi- 
gate the true meaning of the words translated ' eternal,' 
* for ever,' ' world,' and such like, as are found in the 
common version. We are by no means dependent upon 
these words for the complete establishment of every 
point we have attempted to prove ; we could spare them 
all and yet have a superabundance of proof But as 
there are five passages connected with these words that 
Professor Stuart claims as teaching " everlasting misery," 
we shall show the Scripture use of these words ; and we 
shall not only succeed in harmonizing these texts with 
the current teaching of the Bible, but shall Hkewise suc- 
ceed in turning these batteries against our opposers. 

We have said, w^e are satisfied with the definitions of 
these words as given in English, so far as our argument 
is affected thereby ; but we shall find that these words 
are by no means the fair representatives of the Hebrew 
and Greek terms. We remark that the uninitiated in 
ancient languages, being persons of sound judgment, and 
having before them all the passages where any word oc- 
curs, if it be frequently repeated, are as competent to 
judge of the meaning of such word, as are the learned 

We believe that oulom uniformly means an age, with- 
out at all defining the limits of its duration ; and that it 


always refers to a definite period, or age, having a he- 
gi7i7iing and an end, excepting when it refers to " the 
age^' emphatically ; meaning the age or era of Christ's 
personal reign ; which we learn from other expressions, 
wdll be everlasting. The duration of the age referred to 
by the word oulom may be very short or very long, 
as oidom by no means expresses its duration. It 
sometimes expresses an age lasting three days; forty 
days ; a jubilee of seven years ; a jubilee of fifty years ; 
a generation ; the whole of a life time; the remaining 
part of a life time from a specified period ; the age of 
the covenant of circumcision, the age of the supremacy 
of the Mosaic law ; the age of the Aaronic priesthood ; 
the age, or duration of a family ; the period of the con- 
tinuance of a family in being ; the age from Adam to 
Noah ; the age from Noah to Abraham ; the age from 
Abraham to Christ ; the age from the first advent of 
Christ to the second, to the millennial age ; to the ages, 
taken separately, succeeding ; and emphatically, to " the 
age of the Messiah." 

Oulom occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures only as a 
noun : the adverbial form ^\for ever^^ and the adjective 
" everlasting^^ ought never to have been applied to it, 
excepting when it had an undoubted reference to the asre 
or kingdom of the Messiah ; which we learn from other 
sources will have no end. Oulotn occurs in some of its 
forms more than three hundred times in the 0. T., and 
in more than two hundred and fifty cases the Septuagint 
have translated it by the Greek word aion ; in ninety- 
two cases they have used the adjective aionios as being 
applicable to it. In these ninety-two cases it will gene- 
rally admit of the English term everlasting^ but only be- 
cause they refer to the age of the Messiah ; in the other 
places they refer to the mountains ; the Levitical sta- 
tutes ; priesthood ; rites ; covenant ; landmarks ; waste 
places ; (fee. ; so that the words aion^ and aionios^ never 
mean everlasting in themselves ; and as referring to the 
whole period embraced in the era, they will only bear 
such construction w^hen they refer to an age which we 
are taught in unambiguous terms, will never have an 
end ; and even then will bear to be more consistently 
translated as " pertaining to the age of the Messiah ;" 
which paraphrase is rendered necessary, because we, like 


the ancient Hebrews, have no adjective expressive of its 
meaningv An intelligent writer, after deprecating the 
" unfixed practice" of the translators in rendering the 
terms aio7i and aionios — whereby they have obscured so 
many passages — observes, " Most fully may it be grant- 
ed that in the apostolic axiom — * The gift of God is 
eternal laionios'] life,' there is included — infinite, or never 
ending existence. But our persuasion of this fact must 
not be made to hinge on the native or independent force 
of the adjective [aionios~\ there employed ; but upon the 
evident intention of the writer, as illustrated and con- 
firmed by other means." That the translators of the 
Septuagint did not understand the terms aion and aion- 
ioSj as comprehending unlimited duration, is evident from 
the manner in which they have expressed a period be- 
yond what was embraced in these terms. Examples : 
Exo. 15: 18, "The Lord shall reign {Ic-ovlum vaed) for 
ever," is expressed in Greek by " The Lord shall reign 
{to7t aionaj kai ep* aiona, kai eti) from age to age and 
further y It may be questioned whether the Hebrew 
should not be translated " for the age and onivard ;'' 
thus demonstrating that the " for ever" simply, as equal 
to oulorti^ does not include the idea of everlasting dura- 
tion. Dan. 12:3, " They that turn many to righteous- 
ness, (shall shine) as the stars (adai-ad) for ever and 
ever :" the Septuagint translates, eis tous aionas, kai eti,) 
"through the ages, and further.'*^ Mic. 4:5," We will 
walk in the name of the Lord our God (adai-ad) for ever 
and ever;" the Septuagint translates "through the age, 
and beyond ity 


Examples from the Hebrew Scriptures : — Jonah 2 : 6, 
" The earth with her bars w^as about me (leoulom) for 
EVER." Although this " for ever" only embraced a pe- 
riod of three days and three nights, yet it extends through- 
out the w^hole of that period. There was no part of the 
age specified in which * the earth with her bars' were 
not about Jonah. 

Exo. 40 : 15, " And thou shalt anoint them. ...that they 
may minister to me in the priest's oflSce : for their anoint- 
ing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood, throughout 


their generations.'''' Kum. 25 : 13, " Wherefore say be- 
hold I give unto (Phineas) my covenant of peace. And 
he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the cove- 
nant of (i92^/<5??2) an everlasting priesthood: because he 
was zealous for his God." Yet the family of Phineas, 
was entirely deprived of the priesthood within four hun- 
dred years ; for when the sons of Eli transgressed the 
covenant by profaning it, God cut oiF this family and 
transferred the priesthood to the house of Ithamar. — 
Will the reader consult 1 Sam. 2: 12-17, and 27 to end ; 
3 : 1 1^14 ; 22 : 9-20 ; 1 Kings 2 : 27, 35. No part of 
the Aaronic priesthood was designed to be perpetual 
though called oulom : but (Heb. 9 : 10) were ^'imposed 
en them until the time of reformation." See also Heb, 
7: 12-28. 

Deut. 15: 17^ Exo. 21:6, Of the servant that loved 
his master's service, and refused to leave, it is said, 
" Then shalt thou take an awl, and thrust it through his 
ear unto the door, and he shall be thy servant (leoitlom) 
far every Compare Phile. 15 v, '^ He depai'ted for a 
season, that thou shouldst receive him {aionion) for ever," 
with Job 3:19. Both these ^* for evers" mean the age 
or period of their lives, as clearly appears in I Sam. 1 : 
22, " I will bring him that he may appear before the 
Lord, and there abide (le-oulom) for ever^ 11 v, 28 v, "As 
long as he liveth he shall be lent to the Lord." " All 
the days of his life." 2 Kings 5 : 27, " The leprosy of 
Naaman shall cleave unto thee and to thy seed {le- oulom) 
for ever?'' 1 Ki. 9 : 3, " I have hallow^ this house, 
which thou hast built, to put my name there {le oulom) 
for ever ; and my eyes aiad my heart shall be there {Jcol 
hayomeen) all the days." Yet that temple was destroy- 
ed long since. Jer. 17 : 4, " I will cause thee to serve 
thine enemies in the land which thou knowest not : for ye 
have kindled a fire in mine anger, which shall burn (le- 
oulom)for everP Yet the time predicted was only seventy 
years, in which time God brought them back again to 
their own land. 

Isa. 32 : 14, 15, " The forts and towers shall be dens 
{leoulom) for ever, a joy of wild asses, a pasture of 
flocks ; uNTif. the spirit be poured upon us from on high, 
:and the wilderness be a fruitful field." Here the "/<?r 
ever'''' is clearly bounded by another period. 


"We have given enough of examples to prove that ou- 
lorn does not mean everlasting. We give an example ot 
its use as applying to the age of the Messiah. Isa. 9 : 
6, " Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given ; and 
the government shall be upon his shoulder : and his name 
shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, 
The Father of oulom^ The Prince of Peace." The Sep- 
tuagint translates the clause in Italics — which we affirm 
means the Father, Author or Originator of the A^q — ^by 
pater mellontes aionos, " The Father of the coming age." 
And only when ouiom and aion refer to this age of the 
Messiah wiD they bear to be translated for ever ; and 
then only because the age or reign of the Messiah will 
have no end, and not from the import of the words them- 


Gen. 17: 8; 48: 4; Ex. 12:14, 17; 14: 13; 27:20, 
21; 28:43; 30:21; 32:13; Lev. 6 : 18 ; 7:34,36; 
10 : 9, 15 ; 16 : 31, 34 ; 19 : 7 ; 23 : 14, 31, 41 ; 24 : 3, 8 ; 
25:23, 30, 46; Num. 10: 8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 
19:10;Deut. 18:5; 28:46; 29:29; Jos. 4: 7; 8: 
12; 14:9; 1 Sam. 2: 30; 32 : 35 ; 3 : 13, 14 ; 20:15, 
23, 42 ; 2 Sam. 2 : 26 ; 7 : 13, 16, 17, 24, 25, 29 ; 12 : 10 ; 
1 Kings 1:31; 2 : 23 ; 9 : 3,5 ; 8 : 13 ; 10 : 9 ; 2 Kings 
17:37; 21:7; 1 Chr. 15 : 2 ; 17:12,14,22,27; 22: 
10; 23: 13,25; 28: 4, 7, 8; 2 Chr. 2:4; 7: 16; 9:8; 
10:7; 13:5; 20 : 7 ; 21:7; 30 : 8 ; 33 : 4, 7 ; Ezr. 9 : 
12 ; Ne. 2 : 3 ; 13:1; Job 4 : 20 ; 19 : 24 ; 36 : 7; Ps. 
13:1; 22 : 26 ; 24 : 7, 9 ; 48 : 8, 9, U ; 61 : 4, 7 ; 68 : 
16; 74: 1, 10; 77:7,8; 79 : 5 ; 81: 15; 89:46; 103: 
9; 106:31; 125:1; 132:12,14; 148:6; Pro. 12: 
19 ; Ecc. 9:6; Isa. 13 : 20 ; 25 : 2 ; 30 : 8 ; 62: 6 ; Jen 
3:5; 7:7; 17:4,25; 20: 11; 25:5; 36: 6, 19; 49: 
33 ; 50 : 39 ; 51 : 62 . La. 5 : 20 ; Eze. 28 : 19 ; Dan. 2 : 
4 ; 3:9; 5:10; 6 : 6, 21 ; Joel 3 : 20 ; ML 2: 9 ; Zee. 
2:9; Isa. 34: 10, 17; Lev. 3:17; 24:9; Num.19: 
21 ; 28 : 31 ; 29 : 16, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 38 ; 2 Sam. 
9:7,10; 1 Ki. 23 : 31 ; 2 Chr. 7 : 16; Ps.9:6; 40: 
16 ; 50 : 8 ; 52 : 1 ; 72 : 15; 74 : 3 ; 78 : 66 ; 109 : 16 ; 


Jer. 5:22; 23:40; 25:9,12; 51:39,57; Eze. 46 : 
14, 15 ; Hos. 12: 6; and Hab. 3 : 6. There are more 
than one hundred and ninety examples of the limitation 
of "/oT- every A word that must have a limited signifi- 
cation, in so many cases, can never mean ^for ever"* in 
the sense of unending. 


Aion occurs one hundred and four times in the N. T. 
Some derive it from ae% always ; and on^ passing or be- 
ing; an era always passing. It is translated for ever^ 
twenty-eight times ; ever^ one ; evermore^ three times ; 
for ever and ever^ twenty-two times ; thirteen of which 
occur in Eevelation ; with a negative, never ^ eight times ; 
eternal twice : course once ; ages twice ; world thirty-one 
times ; before the world began three times ; beginning of 
the world twice ; while the world standeth^ twice ; and 
world without end once ; thirteen different meanings for 
a word which we believe should always be translated 
* AGE.' In every case where it occurs it will bear this 
translation ; and the reason why it appears in so many 
places to express an unlimited duration, is simply because 
it refers to the oulom^ or aion^ or age^ throughout which 
Jesus Christ shall reign ; which age will have no end. 
The end of aion is often spoken of; and two distinct 
aions are often contrasted, the one to begin where the 
other ends. 


Startle not, gentle reader, at the caption of this 
article ; for \i. aion^ of itself, carries the meaning of "/or 
ever," in one place, it can in no place have a meaning 
that contradicts it. Our translators have endeavored to 
disentangle themselves from this difficulty, by translating 
aion by " world^^- which they have done no less than 
thirty-one times. But " aion'''* never means the material 
world. The proper Greek word for world is " kosmos,^^ 
which occurs one hundred and eighty-eight times in the 
New Testament ; and in one hundred and eighty-seven 
places is correctly translated world ; but in 1 Pet. 3 : 3, 
it is translated " adorning." From thus confounding 


the two words, aion and kosmos^ many have supposed 
that there is another kosmoSj or world, that is now^ and 
will be, the residence of the saints. We give a few ex- 
amples of the end of aion^ or " eternity ;" we shall 
translate it " a^e," but the reader can supplant it by 
the term " for ever^^ or " eternity^'' and be consistent 
and uniform. 

Mat. 13 : 39, 40, " The harvest is sunteleia tou aionoSj 
the end of the age ; and the reapers are the angels. -45, 
therefore, the weeds are gathered together, and burned 
in the fire ; so will it be in sunteleia tou aionos toutou, 
the END of this age.''^ 49 v. " So will it be in sunteleia 
tou aionos, the end of the age." 

Mat. 24 : 3, " Tell us, when will this happen ? And 
what will be the sign of thy coming ? And of the sun- 
teleias tou aionos, the end of the age?'' The mistransla- 
tion of this, and kindred passages, has led many to 
believe, that the material world is to be destroyed, im- 
mediately on the reappearing of Christ ; but no such 
conclusion is warranted from any passage of scripture. 
The apostles understood that the next age, (our present,) 
would continue till Christ should come again, and to this 
age the last two questions refer. 

Mat. 28 : 20, " And lo, I am with you [ye apostles] 
pasas tas hemeras, all the days, heos tees sunteleias tou 
aionos, until the end of the age?'' This evidently refers 
to the remaining days of that age, which ended with the 
apostles. Paul designates these days, in Heb. 1: 1, 

" God hath in these last days, spoken to us by a 

Son, whom he has constituted heir of all things ; on 
w^hose account also he disposed the tous aionas, the 
ages." And John also, 1st Epistle 1 : 18, " Little child- 
ren, it is the last time .... even now are there many 
Anti-Christs, whereby we know that it is the last timey 
In a few years from that time, that age, or everlasting, 
ended in the destruction of Jerusalem, and the abolition 
of the temple service. Heb. 9 : 25, "Nor yet that he 
should ofter himself often .... For then must he often 
have suffered since the foundation of the world, {kos- 
rnos ;) but now once, in the sunteleia ton aionon, end of 
the ages, he hath appeared to abolish sin offering, by the 
sacrifice of iiimself." Many ages, or "/or evers,^^ had 
passed away prior to the sacrifice of the essential being 


of Jesus Christ himself. 1 Cor. 10 : 11," And all these 
things happened unto them for examples, and they were 
written for our admonition, upon whom ta tele ton aionon, 
the ends of the ages are come." 

MANY " everlastings" HAVE PASSED AWAY ! 

liuke 1 : 70, " As he spake by the mouth of his holy 
ones, who have prophesied of him, apo aionoSj since the 
age^^ [began.] Acts 3:21, " Whom the heavens must 
retain until the times of the restoring of all things that 
God hath spoken of by the mouth of his holy prophets^ 
a'po aionos^ since the age^'' [began.] Acts 15 : 18, 
" Known unto God are all his works, apo aionos^ since 
the age'''' [began.] Before, we had the end of eternity ; 
now, we have the beginning of an age, or everlasting, 
that has passed away ! Eph. 3 : 9, " And to show 
clearly, to all, what is the dispensation of the then un- 
revealed doctrine, which was hidden apo ton aionon^ 
from the ages by God, who created all things, on ac- 
count of Jesus Christ . . . . " 11 v. " According to the 
arrangement ton aionon-j of the ages, which he moulded 
in Jesus Christ our Lord." Col. 1 : 26, " The unrevealed 
word, which was hidden apo ton aio?ion, from ages^ and 
from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints." 
Eph. 2:7, " That in tois aionsi^ the ages to come, he 
may show the overflowing riches of his favor." Heb. 
11: 3, " By faith we understand that tous aionas, the 
ages, were produced by the command of God ; so that 
things seen originated from those that are not seen." 

The things " hoped for," and the things " not seen 
as yet," were clearly the promises that God had made 
respecting the ages, the period of Christ's first coming 
and sacrifice, and the period of his second coming to 
reign in his kingdom. Abel believed in the sacrifice of 
Christ, and ofiered a lamb as its symbol. Noah believed 
in things " unseen as yet," " for God had not caused it 
to rain upon the earth ;" (Gen. 2 : 5.) Yet when God 
threatened to rain upon the earth for forty days, he be- 
Ueved, and built tha^ark. Abraham saw by faith the 
fulfilment of the promises afar off, and embraced them, 
and confessed that during his fife-time, he was only a 
stranger in his own land^ that very land that he expected 


to inherit by being raised again from the dead. By 
faith Moses " endured as seeing him," (Christ,) that at 
that time was " unseen ;" that is, " did not then ap- 
pear." To us it is clear, that the reference in Heb. 11 : 
3, is not to the material worlds, but to the ages prophe- 
sied of which were comprehended by faith, and the 
elders obtained a good testimony by believing it : and if 
not here, then no where does aion mean the material 
world. 1 Cor. 2:6, " However we speak wisdom 
among the perfect : but not the wisdom tou aionos tou- 
ton, of this age, nor of the rulers tou aionos toutou, of 
this age, which are coming to nothing. For we speak 
the wisdom of God, which was hidden in an unrevealed 
doctrine ; but which God predetermined, j^ro ton aionon, 
before the ages, (or Jewish jubilees,) should be spoken to 
our glory. Which wisdom none of the rulers tou aionos 
toutou, of this age, knew : for if they had known it, they 
would not have crucified the glorious Lord." Similar 
expressions likewise occur in 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 6 : 12 

1 Tim. 6 : 17 ; 2 Tim. 4 : 10 : Tit. 2 : 12 : Mat. 13 : 22 
Mark 4:19; Luke 16 : 8 ; Eom. 12:2; 1 Cor. 1 : 20 

2 : 6, 8 ; 3 : 18. 




The reader will please compare the common version 
with the translation we give, and if he be very much 
imbued with the notion that aion must sometimes mean 
eternity, he can substitute eternity where we put age. 
Mat. 12 : 32, " For whosoever shall inveigh against the 
Son of Man may obtain pardon ; but whosoever shall 
speak against the Consecrated Spirit, shall never be 
pardoned, neither en toutou to aioni, in this age, oute, 
neither, en to mellonti, in the coming [age] ;" that is, 
neither in the age Christ spake, nor in the succeeding 
age. Eph. 1 : 21, God hath set Christ " at his own 
right hand .... far above all principaUties, .... and 
every name that is named ; not only en to aioni toutou, 
in THIS age ; but also, en to mellonti, in the coming 
[age.]" Mark 10 : 30, " But he shall receive a hundred 
fold, 7itin en to kairo toutou, now in this tiine^ houses 


and brethren .... with persecutions ; and en to aioni, 
in the age to come zoen aionion, the life pertaining to 
the age." Luke 18: 30, is parallel Luke 20: 34, 
*'' Tfee children tmi^ aionos toutou^ of this age^ marry and 
are given in marriage ; but those who shall be esteemed 
worthy tou aionos ekeinou^ of that age^ and the resurrec- 
tion, tes ek nekron^ that one out from among the dead, 
neither marry, nor are given in marriage, neither can 
they die any more." In these passages, the present age 
or eternity, is limited to the present life, as distinguished 
from another age, to commence when Christ shall raise 
the righteous dead. The first age is not everlasting, 
and the second may be included in the thousand years 
reign of Christ over the nations, prior to the thorough 
renovation 'of the earth, the entire destruction of all the 
wicked, and the introduction of glorious ages beyond, in 
which there will be no more sin nor sinners, but aM tlaat 
then exist will be holy and happy. 

There are sixteen cases, in which aion is employed in 
ascriptions of praise to God* In the most emphatic of 
these expressions it will bear the construction, through- 
out the ages of ages ; and does not imply eternity in any 
other manner than in not hmiting the number of the 
ages, and in many places strict grammatical rules would 
compel these phrases to be construed, " untU the a^es 
of ages^'^ or consummation of all things. In five 
cases where it is translated " who liveth for ever and 
ever," it may be construed in the same manner. Indeed, 
there is no word that can be used in the plural^ that of 
iteelf canbe made to express eternity. Professor Stuart 
produces other words that are used in the plural. But 
most unfortunately for his argument, all the words which 
he has adduced, are used in the plural because they 
designate more than one. His examples are, Ehohim^ 
sometimes translated God, gods, rulers, angels, magis- 
trates ; but is a regular plural word ; while the self- 
existent God is called Jehovah Elohim ; which may be 
understood Jehovah of the Elohim : — tabernacles, seas, 
and in Greek^ heavens and sabbaths. Yet there re- 
maineth another sabbath for the people of God ; and 
Peter designates three distinct heavens, and we have a 
more perfect tabernacle. 



The adjective aionios cannot be made to express more 
than the noun aion from which it is derived. Holy does 
not express more than hoUness^ nor does lovely than love. 
"When we read that God is hght, and God is love, it ex- 
presses the idea more emphatically than if we had read 
that God was luminous, or God was lovely. So if aicm 
mean an age, aionios means pertaining to the age, or 
throughout the age, and does not express everlasting- 
otherwise than as couDected with an age, which we are 
taught in other and unambiguous language^ will be ever- 
lasting. The phrase, " shall inherit the kingdom of God," 
expresses an everlasting inheritance, but not from the 
force of any of the terms employed, but because other 
phrases teach us that this kingdom will have no end. 

Aionios occurs seventy-one times in the N. T. ; forty- 
four of these refer to the life of the righteous, and as this 
life is never to end^ so these places will bear the meaning 
of everlasting without any apparent straining of lai>- 
guage ; bat enough of the others are left to show that 
aionios does not of itself imply everlasting; 


2 Tim. 1 : 9, " Who hath saved us.... according to his 
own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ 
Jesus, pro chronon aionion^ before the world began.''' 
But how long before ? Paul tells us that the glad tid- 
ings of the kingdom, and the covenant of the age were 
preached unto Abraham four hundred and thirty years 
before the period alluded to : and before aionion times^ 
which is literal, and means that ^Hncorrvptibility'''' was 
included 4n the promise that was made to Abraham, 
four hundred and thirty years, before the establishment 
of the Jewish jubilees ; but was first illustrated by the 
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead with an incor- 
ruptible nature. Tit. 1:2, " In hope of aionios Fife, 
which God, who cannot lie, promised />?'<9c/^ro^^o?^ azon- 
ion''' [not] before the tvorldijcosmos) began^but before the 
ages of the Mosaic law ; ^' but hath in due times mani- 
fested [the truth of] his word through preaching" [Jesus 


and the resurrection]. Eora. 16: 25,...." And the preach- 
ing of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the 
mystery, which was kept secret chronois aioniois^ during 
the [ages of the law], hut is now made manifest," &c. 
Here are three examples of the adjective aionios, having 
reference to the past and limited time. When the Sa- 
vior intended to express a period, before the beginning of 
the world, he uses this language, in John 17 : 5, " And 
now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with 
the glory which I had with thee pro ton ton kosmon 
einaij before this world was." Observe, it is /cosmos and 
not aionios. 

Lu. 16:9," And I also say to you : make to your- 
selves friends, with this deceitful mammon ; so that when 
it is finished, they may receive you into their aionious 
skenaSj tents of this age." As though he said, make the 
best use of another's riches, that those whom you favor 
may take you to their tents for the present, for God will 
not entrust you with the true and enduring riches. — 
Surely few will contend that the tents of the wicked are 
" everlasting :" the very expression and contrast shews 
that these " tents^^ were to exist but a short time. 

Philemon 15, " For this reason, perhaps, he {Onesimus) 
was separated from thee for a little while, that thou 
mightest possess him aionion, for ever^^ say our trans- 
lators ; and while we commend their consistency we can- 
not commend their judgment. It evidently means dur- 
ing the period or age of his natural life. If our transla- 
tors had uniformly used the words everlasting ox forever 
for aion and aionios, then every reader would have in- 
stantly perceived that these terms could not be the true 
representatives of the Greek words. 

Eev. 14:6," And I saw another angel flying in the 
midst of heaven, having the euaggelion aionion, the gos- 
pel of the [millennial] age, to preach unto them that dwell 
on the earth, to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, 
and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God and 
give glory to him for the hour of his judgment is come." 
As the gospel of the present age contains the glad tid- 
ings of the kingdom, and the offer of pardon and life to 
the unconverted, so the gospel of the angel is the offer of 
pardon to the unconverted prior to the total destruction 
of all the wicked. It will not be contended that those 


who are already " horn agairC in the kingdom, by a re- 
surrection from the dead, need the proclamation of par- 
don ; and there will be no unconverted persons in exis- 
tence ofter the millennial period ; and so it is evident 
that the proclamation of aionios gospel must terminate 
with the termination of the unconverted ; and aionios 
therefore expresses here a limited duration. 

2 Cor. 4 : 17, '' For our light afflictions which are mo- 
mentary, kath huperbolen eis huperholen aionion baros 
doxes hater gazetai hemin^ prepareth us mightily for a 
burden of glory, excessively exuberant beyond the glory 
of the age," or the age-lasting glory ; or, as in the com- 
mon version, the " ettrnaV glory. We pretend not to be 
able to transfuse into the English language the full energy 
of Paul's Greek : it is enough for our argument that it 
expresses something exceedingly intensive beyond what 
is expressed by the phrase aionion baros doxes ^ a burden 
of glory pertaining to the [millennial] age. The aionia 
of the 18th V. expresses an enduring period, but here is a 
period cast be3-ond it, and still another period cast be- 
yond that. Perhaps Paul endeavored to express the 
eternity of the glory by positive expressions rather than 
the usual negative ones, and he evidently considers that 
aionios could not do it. 


The result of our examination stands thus : The noun 
aio7i ALWAYS expresses a limited period ; and the adjec- 
tive aionios cannot be proved, in any passage, to express 
an unlimited period by itself ; and according to the ana- 
logy of all languages, no adjective expresses more than 
th^ noun from which it is derived ; and, therefore, ana- 
logy and facts show, that the adjective is limited within 
the range of the noun. And, further, as aionios has an 
undoubted limited meaning in the passages we have 
quoted, in the Saptuagint, and in classic usage, so we 
conclude that it has a limited meaning in every passage 
w^here it occurs. While most critics concede that awn 
Jias a limited meaning, yet they suppose that the repeti- 
tion of aion expresses eternity. We reply, that if the 
jingle term be hmited, ther^ is no amount of repetition 


can make it unlimited. The repetitions are merely 
Hebrew Greek idioms, used for emphasis. 


We have elsewhere shown, that the scriptures teach 
plainly, unequivocally, repeatedly, and in the most 
forcible and varied language, that the fearful doom of 
the impenitent sinner is death ! in the sense of privation 
of life, or extinction of being ; and, therefore, there is no 
amount of the clearest testimony^ could possibly teach 
the opposite doctrine. It might indeed teach, were it 
to be found, that all the testimony was contradictory 
and unworthy of credit ; and teaching yea and nay of 
the same doctrine, we might be fully justified in rending 
our Bibles to pieces, and scattering them to the winds of 
heaven, as unworthy of the slightest regard ! But, 
blessed be God, the scriptures do not teach yea and nay 
of the same doctrine, but are all Fea and -4me^t, in Christ 
Jesus. All the texts that are adduced, as being sup- 
posed to teach that the wicked will have endless hfe m 
misery, are only supposed to do so, by forcing an un- 
limited construction upon some form of the word aion, 
and upon the assumption, without the slightest vestige 
of sound argument, that every man has an " immortal^ 
never-dying souiy But for this unwarranted assump- 
tion, every child in understanding, would have given to 
the simple and unequivocal expressions of life and deaths 
— as marking the opposite states of the righteous and 
the wicked^ — their plain and obvious import. And it is 
charging God with folly, to say, he uses the term death, 
" The soul that sinneth, it shall die," to express the idea 
that the soul should live for ever in misery ! We might 
call upon theologians to produce a single passage of 
scripture, upon which they could found even a plausible 
argument, irrespective of the assumption of natural im- 
mortality, and the attachment of an w^zlimited meaning 
to the limited word, aion^ — and so, after what precedes, 
we might pass by every text that contains aion^ till the 
impracticable task was accomplished — that would show 
this word always, or even ever, meant of itself, an endless 
duration. But that the reader may be entirely disabused 


of this most horrible do<jtrine, which is so derogatory to 
the character of God, and conflicts so terribly with 
every principle of justice and humanity, which God has 
implanted in the human mind, and that turns the truth 
of God into fables, we shall, as briefly as may be, ex- 
amine further all the texts. For this end, we lay them 
all before the reader, premising however, that the aion 
is not the onhj word that is used out of its ordinary 
meaning, but also the word eis. 


Lest we might be suspected of keeping back, we shall 
bring forward all those texts containing aion^ that are 
enumerated by Professor Stuart, who has labored most 
indefatigably to prop up the tottering Dagon of " eternal 
torments." Presuming our readers to be famihar with 
the common version, we shall put such construction on 
the Greek as we think it will bear, in accordance w^ith 
the analogy of scripture, and the context, 

Jude, 13, " For whom the blackness of darkness is 
reserved, eis ton aiona^ in the age." 2 Pet. 2 : 17, " To 
whom [transgressors] is reserved the blackness of dark- 
ness, eis aiona^ at the age." 

It takes a Professor of Theology to make these texts 
teach endless torment ; besides, eis aiona is marked as 
doubtful by Griesbach, and omitted in the Syriac. We 
consider these phrases as expressive of oblivion of being, 
to w^hich the wricked w^ill be consigned aty and tkraughout 
the ages of the Messiah. 

Eev, 19 : 2, " True and righteous are the judgments 
of God ; for he hath judged the great harlot, who cor- 
rupted the earth with her fornication . . , and her smoke 
ascendeth, eis tons aionas ton aionoUy until the ages of 
agesy 20 : 9, " And they .... encircled the camp of 
the saints, and the beloved city ; and fire came down 
out of heaven from God, and ate them up. And the 
devil that deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire 
and sulphur, where both the beast of prey and the false 
prophet are ; and they will be tormented day and night, 
eis tous aionas ton aionon^ until the ages of the ages." 
Kev. 14 : 9, "A third angel followed them, saying .... 


If any man worship the beast of prey and his image, and 
receive a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also 
shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, \<^hich is 
poured out undiluted into the cup of his indignation, 
and he shall be tormented with fire and sulphur, before 
the holy angels and before the throne, and the smoke of 
their torment ascendeth eis aionas aionon, until the ages 
of ages ; and there is no rest, by day or by night, to 
those that worship the beast of prey, and its image." 
These are all clear examples of the limited meaning of 
" aiony 

The preposition eis^ which we have translated until in 
these passages, because the context requires it, and be- 
cause in this connection it is in accordance with the 
strictest rules of grammar, can never bear the meaning of 
^/or.' Eis properly signifies at; but this its radical 
meaning is differently modified. It sometimes means 
being at^ either as close beside^ or actually ivithin, " He 
actually stood (eis) at the door." " To enter (eis) into 
the temple." " They shall be fulfilled (eis) at their sea- 
son." But it likewise denotes motion or tendency towards 
an object so as to arrive at it ; and then may be render- 
ed to or into when applied to place ; and until^ when ap- 
plied to time; or referring to place; ^' They came (eis) 
to^ or into^ the land of Israel." But, as referring to 
time^ " They feast (eis) until sunset." ** He that endureth 
(eis) until the end shall be saved.". '^ And put them in 
hold (eis) until the next day," It likewise signifies di- 
rected at^ or aimed at^ and then may be translated to^ 
wards^ in respect to, respecting ^ ^c. As all the three 
texts quoted refer to time, we translate m, until, as the 
grammar and context absolutely require. But how can 
these texts teach " eternal torments," when they so evi- 
dently refer to judgments to take place on the earth, and 
to be inflicted on symbolical personages, or systems, 
which " shall be utterly burned with fire," 18:8; or up- 
on a succession of a class of persons, while they continue 
to worship the beast of prey. This is evident from the 
expressions, " Go your ways and pour out the seven 
vials of God's wrath upon the earth^'' during which a 
space was given unto them to repent, '* and they repent- 
ed not." During a period while the kings of the earth, 
that were enriched by, and were associated with Baby^ 


Ion in her wickedness, were existing on the earth, and 
prior to the seven last plagues^ and who " will bewail 
and lament for her when they see the smoke of her burn- 
ing, standing afar off for fear of her toraient." And 
the merchants and the sailors, when they see the smoke 
of her torment, will stand afar off and cry, Alas ! " for in 
one hour is she come to nought." It was during a 
period in which the saints were persecuted and died ; 
for, " Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from 
this time." Again, these torments are called righteous 
judgments, and the measure is " of the cup that she hath 
tilled, fill her to the double." Some may think that 
•^ eternal torments" are a little more than ** double," and 
will scarcely accord with their notions of '' righteous" 
judgments, nor be " according to their works." Yet 
again, these judgments take place during day and night ; 
but " there shall be no night there," in the glorious age. 
While some are destroyed in one way, others are '' slain 
with the sword," or destroyed by milder means. Again, 
l^\iQ place of their torment is to be the great city Baby- 
lon ; but that city is to be so destroyed, that the place 
of it "shall be found no more at all." Either of these 
reasons would be sufficient to set aside the idea that the 
torment will be endless. 


Mat. 18 : 8, " It is better for thee to enter into hfe lame 
or maimed, than... to be cast eis to pur to aionion^ into 
the fire that pertains to the age." 25 : 41, *^ Depart 
from me ye cursed eis to pur to aionion^ into the fire of 
the age." Mark 3 : 29, " But he that shall blaspheme 
(eis) against the Holy Spirit, shall not have forgiveness 
eis ton aiona, at the age, but shall be obnoxious to aion- 
iou kriseoSj the judgment of the age." Heb. 6:2," Not 
again imparting elementary instruction respecting repen- 
tance.. ..and krimatos aioniou, the condemnation of the 
age." Jude 7, " As Sodom and Gomorrha....are set 
forth an example, having undergone the punishment of 
pur OS aioniou^ an eternal fire." This last is Macknight's 
translation. However we may translate aionou here, it 
is certain that it applies to a judgment that has been al- 


ready inflicted. Peter says, 2 Epistle 2:5," God spared 
not the old world, bringing in the flood upon the world 
of the ungodly ; and burned up the cities of Sodom and 
Gomorrha, and condemned them with an overthrow, 
leaving them as an example to those that should after- 
wards Hve ungodly." The pattern then of the manner 
in which the wicked will be punished is utter destruction. 
We have no objection to the calling this destruction 
* eternal^ the cities will never be restored ; but the fire 
does not continue to burn. Neither will the aionion, 
fires, that will be lighted when Christ comes, last long, 
for they will soon utterly consume their fuel. We sup- 
pose we have given the sense of the texts quoted, al- 
though some of them may mean that the results of these 
judgments will be perpetual ; there will be no reversal, 
no future resurrection to those that are destroyed by 
aionion fires. The Syriac reads, that the cities of So- 
dom and Gomorrha " are made a demonstration to the 
wicked who should come after them." The actual man- 
ner of the destruction is set forth in the pattern ; all can 
perceive that they are entirely destroyed ; but how could 
" everlasting torments" be an actual demonstration, see- 
ing that there would never be a period when the sentence 
w^as fully executed ? 

2 Thess. 1:6," Since it is a righteous thing with God 
to repay aflliction to those that aflSict you ; and those 
who are afllicted will he re-enliven w^th us at the mani- 
festation [Syriac] of our Lord Jesus from heaven with 
his mighty angels ; inflicting punishment with flaming 
fire, on those who know not God, and on those who obey 
not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will suffer 
punishment, even olethron aionion^ the destruction per- 
taining to the age^ from [or issuing from] the presence 
of the Lord and the glory of his power.. ..i/i that day ^ 
Common version, " Who shall be punished with ever- 
lasting destruction from the presence of the Lord." Mat. 
25 : 46, " And these apeleusontai will go eis kolasin 
aionion to the cutting off [that takes place] at the age ; 
but the righteous [will go] eis zoen aionion^ to life at 
the age." Common version, " And these shall go away 
into everlasting punishment; but the righteous [shall go 
away] into life eternal." The word apeleusontai appHes 
to both members of the antithesis, and might be trans- 


lated ivill comc^ for strange to say, the word means 
either. Will come would seem more applicable to the 
righteous, but then we must say that the wicked will 
come to the cutting off. Kolasin is a noun from the 
verb kclaso^ the radical meaning of which is to cut off. 
Gen. 8:2," And the rain from heaven w^as cut off." — 
Surely the rain was not " punished." It is used likewise 
in the sense of pruning, lopping off superfluous branches. 
It has as a secondary meaning to restrain. The Greeks 
write., " The charioteer kolaso^ restrains his fiery steeds." 
Now as the cutting off, or even restraining, when applied 
to men is often a punishment, so a third and metaphori- 
cal use of the word may be punishment; though w^e 
think 'punishment^ as a meaning of the word kolaso^ 
would never have found its way into the Greek Lexicons, 
had it not been first used by our translators. The word 
in some of its forms, occurs Acts 4 : 21, " Finding no- 
thing how they might cut them off." They had already 
punished them, by putting them in hold, but they feared 
to cut them off, because of the people. 2 Pet. 2 : 9, 
"The Lord knoweth how.. reserve the unjust unto a 
day of judgment to be cut off," as were the antediluvians 
and the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. 1 John 4:18, 
" In love there is no fear, therefore perfect love casteth 
off fear; because fear (echei) is to be (kolasin) cut off." 
Echei often bears the sense of to be. These are all the 
places where kolaso occurs in the N. T., and there exists 
not the slightest necessity, in any case, of departing from 
its radical meaning. Mat. 25 : 46, is considered the 
strongest text in the Bible in favor of " eternal torments." 
But after seeing a correct and literal translation, we can- 
not perceive how even the most reckless can extract 
even an inference from it to favor torture of any kind. 
But the text that we have placed in juxtaposition with 
it, declares that there will be punishment by flaming fire 
which is to end in the destruction of the wicked " in that 
day," " when the Son of Man shall come in his glory." 
Professor Stuart says, " I take it to be a rule of con- 
struing all antithetic ^orm^ of expression, that where you 
can perceive the force of one side of the antithesis, you 
do of course come to a knowledge of the force of the 
other side." Very well. Will the reader observe the 
points of opposition. Christ sitteth upon the throne and 



the righteous and the wicked are gathered before him. 
The righteous are invited to the inheritance of a kingdom 
that will have no end, which inheritance imphes the liv- 
ing throughout the reign of Christ, while the wicked iire 
driven into a fire that will not go out till it has utterly 
consumed its fuel, and so the wicked will be utterly con- 
sumed. And now for the two sides of the antithesis. 

The righteous 
The wicked 

will go to 
will go to 

the cutting: off 

aionion : 

The only points opposed are, " The righteous," " The 
wicked," " Life," and " The cutting off " : the other parts 
are exactly the same. AVe understand the meaning of 
the Jirst member of the sentence so far as the opposition 
is concerned. Now as life means conscious exis- 
tence, and the other must be its opposite, so the other 
must mean "the cutting off" from life, or death, the 
privation of life, the extermination of being ; which many 
other Scriptures declare will take place when Christ 
comes. It matters not how aionion may be construed, 
as it only refers to the age or period of the manifestation 
of Christ, the day of the Lord, " that shall burn as an 
oven : and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, 
shall be stubble : and the day that comet h shall burn, 
them UP, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them 
neither root nor branch." 

We have endeavored, as was duty, to set this text in 
the clearest hght, to show that not a vestige of an argu- 
ment can be predicated upon it to sustain " eternal tor- 
ments." But to do this effectually there is no need to 
depart from the common translation. Let ' /^/e,' and 
^]junishment,^ and ' everlasting^^ have their proper Eng- 
lish meanings, notwithstanding that by this we spoil the 
antithesis ; and then it follows that the punishment will 
be everlasting —which we readily concede will be the 
case — and now we have to determine the nature of the 
punishment, which our text in 2 Thess. 1 : 6, declares to 
be " everlasting destruction." A destruction from 
which there will be no restoration, which will continue 
for ever, is properly called an everlasting destruction. — 
But to sustain a fiivorite hypotheses some will contend 
that punishment implies conscious existence and that 


death is no punishment. Suppose your son is condemn- 
ed for some delinquency, to one year's imprisonment and 
hard labor, as a punishment therefor ; will you petition 
the governor to mitigate his punishment by giving an 
order for his immediate execution ? Will ye arrest the 
murderer, when upon your hypothesis, he has commit- 
ted no injury to his victim ? fie candid now and confess 
that the punishment of death is the capital punishment. 
" I will punish her children with death." 

There are two texts in the 0. T. that are sometimes 
quoted : Dan. 12 : 2, " And many of those that sleep in 
the dust of the earth shall omake ; these to le oulom,^ per- 
petual life, and those to reproach and perpetual abhor- 
* rence." As at the period here alluded to, the righteous 
only will be raised, and as the text says nothing about 
the suffering or even the resurrection of the wicked, so 
the text is not in point. Isa. 33: 14, "Who can dwell 
with everlasting burnings ?" Answer ; none : for they 
would burn them up. 

There is not a single case of the occurrence of the 
word aionios^ when it does not relate to the age of Christ, 
but what absolutely requires a limited meaning. The 
reader will find upon inspection that more than sixty 
times aionio7is has reference to the age of Christ. And 
Professor Stuart himself confesses that, " The word 
aionios, therefore, is, in the Septuagint, less strictly ap- 
plied to indefinite time^ an unlimited period^ than it is 
in the N. T. Just the same is the case with oion^ as we 
have already seen." Add to this confession the fact, 
that the sample of these " everlasting burnings" and 
" unquenchable fires," that have already been inflicted 
upon Sodom and Gomorrha, and upon Edom, and their 
wicked inhabitants, have long since ceased : See Isa. 66 : 
24; 34:8; 1:28; 10:16,17; Ezk. 20:47; compare 
the prophecy, 2 Kings 22: 17, with its accomphshment, 
25:9; Mat. 3:10, 12; 13:30; and we shall readily 
perceive that no inference can be sustained, that is drawn 
from the use of the word aion or aionios, to favor the 
immortahty of the wicked. But the whole Scriptures 
harmonize in the declaration that man is mortal, and 
that God has offered us incorruptible life through Jesus 
Christ, and bids us " seek for" it 





This parable has been insisted upon as proof of the conscious 
state of men in death, and of eternal torments to the wicked ; ' 
but we believe it affords no evidence of either. If it could be 
demonstrated to be a history^ and not a parable, it would not 
prove that wicked men are to be endlessly tormented ; because 
the scene is laid immediately after death and before the judg- 
ment ; hence, is not the punishment which follows judgment: 
that punishment may be death or literal annihilation for all this 
case teaches. But the whole is a parable ; and this fact is so 
notorious that scarcely any commentator, or any intelligent wri- 
ter, pretends to question it. To call it a '''literal history,'^ in 
these days, is to manifest fixed bigotry, profound ignorance, or 
willful opposition to clearly settled truth. We shall therefore 
occupy no space in proving it a parable, but proceed at once to 
its exposition. 

Pambles are never given to teach doctrine, but to illustrate 
some truth already partially known or about to be announced ; 
and no parable is ever to be interpreted on the principle that 
every item contained in it was designed to have an application. 
Bishop Lowth says — " Parable is that kind of allegory which 
consists of a continued narration of fictitious or accommodated 
events applied to the illustration of some important truth." — 
The scope and design of a parable is all we need to concern our- 
selves about; and to attempt a particular application of every 
expression in it is to enter the field of speculation where the 
most fanciful will be the most successful in turning off* eyes 
from the real design of him who spake the parable. 

The key to a parable is either in the parable itself or in the 
discourse connected with it. In the case before us, it is in the 
context. The scope, or design of the parable was to teach the 
effect to follow upon two classes of men by a change from the 
Mosaic, or Law-dispensation to the Christian, or Gospel dispen- 
sation. This fact is clearly set forth in the 17th verse, which is 
the key to the parable, and unlocks it perfectly. That verse 
reads thus — " The law and the prophets were" [preached] "until 


John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached." That 
is, a new dispensation of God's favor is now opened ; no longer 
to be confined to the Jews, or one nation, but to embrace '' all 
nations" in its offered benefits. This change would atVect very 
differently two different classes of men ; viz., the Jews, who 
were under the law, and the Gentiles, who arc to be embraced 
under the gospel, or to be made partakers of those peculiar 
blessings which had been hitherto so exclusively confined to 
the sons of Abraham. The effects of this change are illustrated 
by the parable under consideration. The parties concerned and 
to be affected are distinctl}' marked. The items relating to the 
rich man clearly mark him as the representative of the Jews, as 
a people. We note his case first. His dress. He was *' clothed 
in 'purple andjine liiien.^^ Now turn to " the law^'' that was 
'•''until Johnr and see what was the clothing of the priests under 
that law. See Exodus 28; where Moses was commanded to 
make for Aaron and the other priests '' garments for glory and 
beauty." Verses 5, 6, 8, and 15 — "And they shall take gold, 
and blue, and purple, and scarlet and Jine linen. And they 
shall make the ephod of gold, blue, and purple, scarlet, and Jine 
twined Ii7ie7i. ** And thou shalt make the breast-plate * * of 
purple * * and^?ie twined linen." Such were the peculiarities 
of the dress, or clothing of these representatives of the law and 
the Mosaic dispensation, or Jewish sj^stem. These peculiarities 
our Lord commences with in his description of the rich man; 
and they are sufficiently striking to satisfy the unprejudiced in- 
quirer after truth that the Jews, nationally, were to be repre- 
sented by the rich man in the parable. The Jews were 7^ch in 
those abundant communications of truth, knowledge, and pecu- 
liar privileges which God had endowed them with by direct com- 
munications, or through the prophets whom he had raised up to 
instruct them from time to time, till at length he spake unto 
them " by his Son^ Rich were they, indeed, in these high and 
exalted advantages over all other nations and people. It were 
easy to enlarge here, but we study brevity. The period of their 
exclusive enjoyment of those peculiarities was their " life-time ;" 
but the time came that those peculiarities were to pass away ; 
and that period is represented as a death. It was the death of their 
whole ecclesiastical polity — it was now to be superseded by a 
more spiritual and universal system, embracing other people : 
the " life-time^'' of their peculiarities is ended — the change has 
come over them, symbolized b}' a death and burial. Where 
next is this once rich man found? Is it in the theological 
helll No: it is not even in Gehenna ; but, in Hades. The 
preceding part of this work has sufficiently explained these 
terms, and we do not therefore stop to dwell upon them here. 
The rich man is alive after his ecclesiastical death ; but is stript 
of all his peculiarities and reduced to a state of wretchedness and 
torment. And does not the history of the Jews, as a people, 


iVom the overthrow of their temple, city, and sacrifices 
there, unto this day, or present century, fully justify the parabo- 
lical description given by our Lord of the miscr}^ to which they 
would be subjected under the new dispensation which was to 
follow theirs ? No one can doubt this who has any knowledge 
of their history for the last eighteen hundred years : and if we 
have not understanding of their history, read the prophecies of 
the judgments threatened them, Lev. 26th and Deut. 28th 
chapters, and '*be no longer faithless but believing." '* Wrath 
has come upon them to the uttermost." 1 Thess. 2: 16. And 
Jesus said, relative to the overthrow of their city and the tribu- 
lation to attend and follow that event — " These be the days of 
vengeance that all things which are written may be fulfill" 
erf." Lk.21:22. 

Since the ecclesiastical and national death of the Jews — the 
rich man — there has been a claim maintained among them that 
^* Abraham" is their *' father;" but no relief has come to them 
from that quarter. 

The desire expressed by the rich man, that further light or 
information should be given to convince the nation or people of 
Jews, by a resurrection of one from the dead, is met, in the 
parable, by showing that no further information would avail 
with those who had rejected all the previous light God had given 
them : and the answer — " neither will they be persuaded though 
one rose from the dead," — was shown to be true by the conduct 
of "the chief priests and pharisees," when Jesus actually raised 
a ^^ Lazarus''^ from the dead, [John 11th,] the}^ called a " coun- 
cil," and " from that day forth took counsel together for to put 
Jesus to death." How true that they would not " be persuaded 
though one rose from the dead ;" and after they had accomplish- 
ed their bloody purpose, and put Christ to death, and he also 
had been raised from the dead, under such circumstances that 
there was no chance to doubt the fact, the same obstinate unbe- 
lief remained ; and they gave large sums of money to the sol- 
diers to tell the most silly and improbable lie that was ever in- 
vented ; viz., That the disciples of Jesus came by night and stole 
Jesus away while they slept ! ! 

Thus the parable, so far as the rich man is concerned, has a 
fair and full application, and illustrates the obstinate unbelief and 
consequent misery and torment of that people, after their final 
refusal to receive Jesus as the Messiah. 

It only remains now briefly to consider that part of the para- 
ble relating to the poor man, or Lazarus. Prior to the change 
in the dispensations, from the Mosaic to the Christian, the Gen- 
tiles were poor indeed in religious knowledge, and excluded from 
the peculiar privileges of the Jews — the rich man. They could 
only approach the ^'' outer cau.rf^ — or ''gate" — of the Temple ser- 
vice: where some of them sought the '^ crumbs^^ of knowledge 
which might better their condition. Still their general condi- 


tion in regard to divine *•' things" was *-evil." The time at 
length arrives when they are no longer to remain in this condi- 
tion, and that change — to keep up the harmony of the parable — 
is represented by a death. They pass out of their previous state 
and find themselves in ** Abraham's bosom" — partakers in that 
covenant God made with Abraham ; for, "If ye be Christ's then 
are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." 
Gal. 3 : 29. To this honor they are brought through the minis- 
tration of angels — aggellon — messengers. Christ gave his mes- 
sengers commission to " go into all the world and preach the 
gospel to every creature." Under this commission the})- brought 
many Gentiles into the Abrahamic covenant; for, The Scripture 
foreseeing that God would justify the heathen [the Gentiles,] 
through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, 
*'In thee shall all nations be blessed." Gal. 3; 8 And the 
apostle adds — '• So then they which be of faith are blessed with 
faithful Abraham:" they are in •' Abraham's bosom :" a phrase 
which imports a partaker of his blessings and being in the same 
covenant relation to God. In this condition are all believing 
Gentiles, and are now ^'' comforted f while the obstinate unbe- 
lieving Jew from the time of Christ, or from the introduction 
of the Christian dispensation, has been '"tormented:'''^ and the 
" ^m//*" between the two dispensations is "mpa^^afeife" — they 
cannot be joined in one : to come into the blessings of the Chris- 
tion dispensation is impossible to any one still cleaving to the 
Mosaic for justification; and to return from the Christian to the 
Mosaic is to *' fall from grace," and to be swallowed up in the 

We might greatly enlarge the proof that the foregoing is the 
true srcope and design of the parable ; but we believe enough has 
been said to satisfy the candid inquirer after truth, and we have 
no expectation that obstinate bigotry will be removed, even tho' 
another Lazarus should arise from the dead and affirm the truth 
of the exposition we have here given. 





We propose a historical inquiry into the present popular 
opinions on the doctrine of Human Immortality. The no- 
tions now current on this subject we believe to be altogether 
unscriptural, and a most mischievous corruption of BibUcal 
Christianity. The unscriptufal character of these current 
opinions we intend to discuss and disclose. At present we 
are but doctrinal chroniclers, — historians of opinions. Our 
inquiry will demonstrate that there is such a thing as an 
hereditary faith, not necessarily a Scriptural faith. We 
think it will demonstrate more, — that such a faith is the 
popular faith in the theory of the soul's intrinsic immortality, 


The Apostolical Fathers, or Clement of Eome, Polycarp, 
Ignatius, Barnabas and the Pastor of Hermas, are so call- 
ed as having been contemporaries with the Apostles of our 
Lord. Their opportunities of being informed concerning 
the doctrines of -Christianity were therefore pecuhar, ana 
their testimony is of a corresponding value. Let us not, 
however, unduly exaggerate the doctrinal value of their 
writings ; for although their opportunities were what we 
have stated, it is quite conceivable that other circumstances 
should tend to depreciate the value of their personal testi- 
mony. Their testimony is nevertheless valuable, if not au- 
thoritative ; and by the clearer light of Scripture they may 
be read with considerable profit. In their writings, we 
never meet with those conventional phrases of modern ortho- 
doxy about the soul, — its separate state and iramortahty. 
" Immortal soul," — ^^ never-dying soul," — ^^ deathless soul," 


^' separate soul," — " disembodied soul," — these and such 
like expressions are never to be met with in the canonical 
and primitive Scriptures. They belong to a more recent 
religious nomenclature. The prevaihng opinions of the 
Apostolical Fathers are clearly set forth in their epistolary 
writings, where they uniformly speak as if they had no 
philosophy about the elementary constittients of the human 
constitution, but regarded man as one indivisible being, de- 
pending upon his organization for his personal existence. — 
In the estimation of these early writers death was the abso- 
lute decease of the conscious being man, and he could only 
live after dissolution by being re-organized, or raised up 
from the dead. They never allude to a state of conscious- 
ness between death and resurrection, but speak much of 
their hope in being raised up out of their graves by their 
Lord, — ** the Resurrection and the Life." It should strike 
the reader as very remarkable that the Apostolical Fathers 
never allude to a state of glorification for the righteous in 
a disembodied condition of existence, when this is the grand 
theme of modern Christian teaching and hope ; and on the 
other band, that they so frequently and emphatically refer 
to a being raised up out of the grave, when the resurrection 
occupies so subordinate a place in the present popular creed 
and ordinary pulpit ministrations. The coming of Christ 
too, — how they dwell upon and hail that event ! — like the 
beloved Apostle, '' Come, Lord Jesus !" — " Even so, come, 
Lord Jesus !" The second coming of Christ was a neces- 
sary and cardinal doctrine in the creed of those primitive 
saints, who, like their apostolic contemporary, ^' suffered 
the loss of all things" to " attain unto the resurrection of 
the dead." 

But let them speak for themselves : — " Blessed are those 
priests," writes Clement, "who having finished their course 
before these times, have obtained a fruitful and perfect dis- 
solution."...." All the ages of the world, from Adam even 
unto this day, are passed away ; but they who have been 
made perfect in love have, by the grace of God, obtained a 
place [by inheritance, not yet by realization] among the 
righteous, and shall be made tnanifest in the judgment of 
the kingdom of Christ. For it is written, * Enter into thy 
chambers for a little space, till my anger and indignation 
shall pass away : and I will remember the good day [the 
resurrection day], and will raise you up out of your 
GRAVES." I Ep. to Corinth. 


Says Polycatp, ^^ If we please [the Lord] in this present 
world, we shall also be made partakers of that which is to 
•come, according as he has promised to v^ that he will raise 
us from the clead^ and that if we shall walk worthy of him, 
we shall also mgn tog^th^r with himJ'' Ep. to Philip, 

Ignatius, in the following quotation, expresses plainly his 
belief that immortality is not inherent in the human consti- 
tution, but a comiminication through Christ, as says the 
Apostle, — " The gijtoi God is eternal life {or immortality] 
through "OUT Lwd Jesus Vkrist^ In his Ej«s. to the Eph., 
Ignatius writes, — " For this cause did the Lord suffer 
the ointment to be poured on his head [or was anoint- 
ed for his burial] that he relight breathe the breath of im- 
^Lortality into his Church, Be ye not therefore anointed 
with the -evil savor of tfie doctrine of the prince of this 
world, let him not take you captive/ro;^^ the life that is set 
hefore youP Again : Men's ignorance was taken away, 
and the old kingdom abohshed, God himself being made 
manifest in the form of ;a man,yc>r the renewal of eternal 
Ufe. From thence began what God had prepared ; ^r<?^;t 
thenceforth things were disturbed, /or^smwc^ as he designed 
to abolish deaths And yet again : " That ye [he says], 
breaking one and the «ame bread, w^hich is the medidjie of 
immortality^ our antidote that we should not die^ but live 
for &ver in Christ Jesus,^^ In his Epi«tle to the Magne- 
sians, Ignatius writes, — ^^^ Seeing then all things have an end, 
there are these two together set before us, death and life:; 
and every one shall depart unto his proper place." To the 
'Trallians he writes : Jesus Christ " was truly raised from 
the dead by his Father, after the manner as He will also 
raise up us who believe in Him, by Christ Jesus, without 
whom we have no true life.'''' To the Romans he writes : 
'^^ For it is good for me to set from the world unto God, 
^hat I may rise agahi unto him.... T^ut if I shall suffer, I 
shall then become the freeman of Jesus Christ, and shall 
Hsefree.''^ There is a \qtj :singular passage in the Epistle 
to the Smyrnaeans which at tfirst si^ht may appear to favor 
the notion that m^n can live in a state of disembodiment. 
'" He [Christ] suffered truly, as he also truly raised uphim- 
■selt ; and not as some unbehevers say, that he ^cmly seemed 
to suffer, they themseOives only seeming to be. And as 
fthey believe so it shdl -happen -mit© them, when being di- 
vested of the body, they shall become mere spirits^'''' or in- 
<jorporeal. That the reader maj understand thi^ passage. 


it is necessary to remark that Ignatius is here alluding to a 
very mischievous heresy which sprung up in the apostolie 
age, under the name of Docetism^ or the doctrme of the 
Docetae. This sect were so called because they professed 
the opinion that Christ did not really suffer and die on the 
crosSy but only in appearance. They denied the reality of 
Christ^s corporeal nature^aad maintained that his flesh and 
blood were phantasmal only. Their name,. Docetae, is de- 
rived from a Greek word signifying to seem or appear. 
Now, it is against the professors of this strange notion, that 
Christ was a mere phantom, that Ignatius directs his re- 
marks. His language is obviously ironical. He certainly 
bad no Scripture warrant for saying that these primitive 
heretics should hve after death as disembodied souls, nor 
does he indeed say so. What he says virtually is, that 
when they are dead they shall pass away into mere phan- 
toms, — or have no real existence. So far from according 
with the present popular notions of a state of disembodi- 
ment for the soul or spirit, this language makes directly 
against that notion ; for it is the utterance of a malediction, 
— the ironical denunciation of a punishment suitable to the^ 
abettors of so silly a heresy. " I know," he adds, " that 
even after his resurrection he was in the flesh ; and I beUeve 
that he is still so. And when he came to those who were 
with Peter, he said unto them, * Take, handle me, and see 
that I am not an incorporeal demon.'' " Not as some in our 
own day strangely imagine our Lord to mean, that he was- 
not a disembodied huinari soul ; because he said, * Handle 
me and see ; for a spirit [not my spirit] hath not flesh and 
bones, as ye see me have." " Behold my hands and my 
feet," said our Lord, " that it is I myself^'' not some other 
spiritual being, — or, as Ignatius expresses it, an " incorpo- 
real demonJ^ Neith-ei* our Lord nor Ignatius make any 
allusion to such a notional entity as a disembodied soul, or 
spirit. This Apostolical Father treats at some length of 
this heresy, which it is easy to understand, was of a very per- 
nicious character. The following words express more em- 
phatically his Bocetic antagonism, and at the same time set 
Ibrth his views of the future life, only through a resurrec- 
tion from the dead. " If all these things were done only 
in show by our Lord,, then do I also seem only to. be bound. '^ 
...." But much better would it be for them to receive it 
[that is, the doctrine of Christ's real humanity and passion 
on the cross^ of which the eucharist was the symbol]^ that 


they wight one day rise through it.^^ The Apostolical Fa- 
thers opposed the error of the Docetse, chiefly on the ground 
that it destroyed the reality of Ohrist^s resurrection ; for 
if he only seemed to suffer and die, he could only have seemed 
to rise again, and hence their Christian hope of future life, 
and its grand evidence and pledge, were both denied and 
destroyed. The doctrine of the Apostolical Fathers was 
that of the Apostles themselves, that " if Christ be not 
raised" from the dead, '* faith is vain," and " they which 
are fallen asleep in Christ are perished ;" because without 
a resurrection they cannot live again ; and if Christ is not 
raised from the dead, but is still under the power of death 
and will ever remain so, then none will be raised, — there 
can be no future Hfe. — all are ^^ perished^ 

The object of Christ's mission is thus set forth by Barna- 
bas in his Catholic Epistle, — "Now, how he suffered for us, 
seeing it was by men that he underwent it, I will show you. 
The prophets having received from him the gift of prophe- 
cy, spake before concerning him ; but he, that he might 
abolish death, and make known the resurrection from the 
dead, was content, as it was necessary, to appear in the 
flesh, that he might make good the promise before given to 
our fathers ; and preparing himself a new people, might 
demonstrate to them, whilst he was upon earth, that after 
the resurrection he would judge the worlds Now, as judg- 
ment precedes rewards and punishments, this language ob- 
viously impHes that until the resurrection takes place there 
can be neither a state of reward nor punishment. " It is 
appointed unto men," says the Scripture, " once to die, but 
after this the judgment.^'' Not, as the popular Christianity 
teaches, " after death" rewards and punishments, — then re- 
surrection from the dead, — then judgment, — and then again 
rewards and punishments ! Such bungling and confusion 
belong not to the revelation of Scripture nor the creed of 
the apostolical believers. 

The passages bearing on this subject in the writings of 
the Pastor of Hermas are too numerous for quotation here. 
Suffice it to say, that he uniformly describes the condition 
of the unconverted as a state of death, and union with 
Christ as securing the hope of a future and eternal life. 
Nothing can be plainer than that the ApostoHcal Fathers 
were consentaneous in the belief of the essential mortality 
of the human race ; that they had no philosophy concern- 
ing the human nature corresponding to the Platonized 

292 Bible vs. tradition.— appendix. 

Christian philosophy of modern times ; and that their only 
expectation of the future life was by means of a resur- 
rection from the dead. It is undeniable that they believed 
nothing about disembodied human souls, and a condition 
of rewards and punishments intermediate between death 
and resurrection. In this mortal interval, the dead, ac- 
cording to them, slumbered in ** the land of forgetfulness.'' 
[Psa. 88 : 10-12.J Thought ceased its activity, and con- 
sciousness, hke the expired flame, had become extinguish- 
ed. These primitive saints, in common with prophets and 
apostles, looked forward to the " good day,'' — the day of 
the Lord's second coming, to open the graves of his slum- 
bering ones, and redeem them from the dominion of death. 
Their hope was in a resurrection from the dead, hence they 
preached the resurrection of Christ as the evidence and 
pledge of his people's resurrection unto Hfe, and jealousy 
guarded this first principle of Christian doctrine against the 
contemporary heresies, among which that of the Docetse 
was the chief How unlike the degenerate theology of 
modern Christianity, in which the grand cardinal doctrine 
of Resurrection from the Dead is almost lost sight of! — 
The pagan philosophy of Plato, patronized by the popular 
churches, has substituted the doctrine of an independent 
human immortality^ hence immortality as the gift of God 
by Christ is not known ; it has taught the world to believe 
in a state of Hfe during death, hence the modern Christiani- 
ty has an imported phraseology about " departed souls," 
" immortal souls," " souls in glor}^," " souls in torments," 
of which the Scriptures and Apostohcal Christians know 
nothing. A state of glorification immediately after death 
for the " disembodied soul," obviously supersedes the doc- 
trine of a resurrection. Let the Churches of our degene- 
rate modern Christendom mark the contrast betw^een the 
scriptural and primitive doctrine of Immortality and that 
doctrine as professed by themselves. Let them note the 
dtrange phenomena, that the Apostles and their contempo- 
raries speak much of life as the gift of God by Christ, and 
life obtainable by resurrection, and never once allude to 
" immortal souls," and " souls in glory," or ''torment," at 
death ; whereas both the. Protestant and Popish Churches 
(the latter, indeed, to no small advantage) reverse this mode 
of preaching, — they preach, in strange contradiction to in- 
spired and primitive testimony, that man is immortal by 
natural constitution, and that he can live while he is dead. 


Thanks be to God, amidst this doctrinal dej 
Scripta manet I 


The controversy concerning human immortality com- 
menced so early as the latter part of the second century, 
and was, as might be supposed, considerably influenced by 
the philosophical notions of the time concerning the con- 
stitution of man. The anthropology, or doctrine of man, 
of the earlier theologians, embraced a threefold division of 
the elements of his nature into body, soul, and spirit. The 
language of the Apostle Paul, in 1 Thess. v. 23, was ac- 
cepted, not in its proper rhetorical, but in a strictly philo- 
sophical sense, and interpreted according to the philosophy 
of the times. Some adopted the duahstic theory, or two- 
fold division of the nature of man into body and soul ; the 
latter being regarded as a substance essentially distinct 
from the corporeal part or body. The question of human 
immortahty thus from the first became mixed up with 
speculative ideas, and a phraseology, the offspring of the 
primitive philosophy, was begotten, which has unfortunate- 
ly survived to our own times and added much to the con- 
fusion and difficulty of the inquiry. It is of the first im- 
portance to apprise the student of this controversy that the 
inquiry took at the outset a particular form, — a strictly 
philosophical form. The question was rather metaphysical 
than religious, although it involved important rehgious con- 
sequences. The ancient anthropology lay at the basis of 
the theological inquiry concerning the immortality of man. 
Hence the peculiar phraseology of the primitive philoso- 
phical theology. The question was not concerning the inl- 
mortality oiman in his complete characteristic nature, but 
concernmg the immortality of the soul as a supposed dis- 
tinct and separable part of man, and the seat of the human 
personality. If immortality pertained to man's natural 
constitution, it could only pertain to that part of him which 
was imagined to be independent of any material organiza- 
tion, and not liable to the laws of material existence. The 
soul was considered to be this part, — an immaterial sub- 
stance, capable of existing in a state separate from the body. 
It is undeniable that this notion about the separate state 
of the soul, and its being the seat of personal consciousness, 
was an importation into Christianity of the old Greek philo- 


£.ophy. The departed souls of the early Christianity were 
the shades of Homer and the Greeks. 

We are anxious to guard our readers against the very 
natural mistake ot identifying the ideas of the early specu- 
lative Christians with those of the sacred writers. The 
terminology of their philosophy, in regard to the terms 
soul, spirit, body, flesh, is the terminology of the Scriptures, 
and there is a danger of concluding that these terms, com- 
mon to both, have a common value and signification. The 
locality or state of the dead, moreover, is called, both in 
Scripture and the Greek philosophy, HadeSy the unknown 
or unseen place or state, as this word etymologically means. 
But it may suffice here, for the sake of showing the diffe- 
rence between the Hebrew theology and the Grecian philo- 
sophy, that while the Greeks peopled their Hades with dis- 
embodied spirits or souls in a state of consciousness and 
activity, the sacred writers describe their Hades as the 
resting place of the dead, — a condition of " darkness," — a 
" land of forgetfulness," — where thought and memory are 
extinguished, and silence alone prevails. " The dead know 
not anything." '' In that very day their thoughts perish." 
" The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down 
into silence." Let our readers mark this important distinc- 
tion, lest they be betrayed into the common popular error 
of supposing that the terms soul, body, &c., of Scripture 
have the same verbal value as these terms have in the 
speculative theology of the second century, and which, 
through the prevalence of the ancient philosophy during the 
successive periods of historic Christianity, has become the 
orthodox theology of our own times. Modern, as well as 
ancient Christianity, retains the faith of the old Pagan 
philosophy of the Greeks concerning the soul and its im- 
mortality, and regardless of the extraordinary consequences 
of imposing these Pagan ideas upon the sacred nomencla- 
ture of the Bible, persists in avowing the ancient philoso- 
phical faith, and interpreting the Scriptures on its false 

The scriptural inquiry, as we have already remarked, 
concerns not the soul as a distinct substance and part of 
man, but man as a creature of God, " fearfully and won- 
derfully made." The former is strictly a philosophical, the 
latter a religious, inquiry. But the deductions of human 
philosophy have ever been intruded into this religious ques- 
tion, and have so eflectually influenced the language of the 


controversy, that without <jarefuliy noting this fact, confus- 
«ion and dissatisfaction must necessarily ensue. At the 
very opening of the inquiry, in the discussions which took 
place ill the second century, we observe a departure from 
the language of Scripture, and a phraseology employed 
<3oincident with the ancient philosophy. The inquiry im- 
properly relates to the soui^ instead of to the ivhole man^ of 
how many soever parts he may be compounded. But not- 
withstanding this circumstance, there were those who, in- 
olining no doubt to the Scripture revelation, — that immor- 
tality is a gift or Christian rewaad^ and not a personal or 
inherent possession, — 'demed the immortality of the abstract 
isoul, and maintained that it perished in death with the body. 

Among these Justin Martyr must unquestionably be 
numbered. In hi-s Dialogue with Trypho there occurs a 
passage which, whatever he may have meant by it, certain- 
ly involves the eondiusion that the soul is not in itself, by 
•constitution, immortal. " I indeed say not that all souls 
die,'' certainly implies that some souls die, and if some die, 
then there is nothing in the souPs constitution essentially 
independent of destruction. " At the time of judgment," 
he again says, ^^ those ^ouh that appear worthy of God die 
no more; but the rest shall be punished as long as G>od 
shall be pleased to continue their existence, and their punisb- 
tnent." Tatian is more explicit. " The soul in itself," he 
■says, " is not immoi'tal, but mortal ; nevertheless it has the 
power of escaping mortality." Theophilus of Antioch 
raises the following question, ^* Was Adam created with a 
mortal or immortal nature ?" and replies, ^^ neither the one 
fior the other, but he was fitted for both, in order that he 
might receive immortality as a reward." The historian 
of doctrines, Professor Hagenbach, remarks on the state of 
the controversy at this period, that it had " more of a philo- 
sophical than Christian bearing.... The Christian doctrine of 
immortality," he «ay«, -" cannot be considered apart from 
the person, work, and kingdom of Christ, and must rest 
^pon Christian perceptions and promises." 

The testimony of Irenseus, the contemporary of Justin 
Martyr, is equally emphatic. He argued that whatever 
had a birth or beginning mu«t be mortal and corruptible. 
^^ Life," he writes, " is not from, ourselves, nor from our na- 
ture, but it is given ar bestowed according to the grace of 
God; and therefore he who preserves thi& gift of life and 
returns thanks to him who bestows it, he sh.ill receive 


length of days for ever and ever. But he who rejects it aD(3 
proves unthankful to bis Maker for creating him, and will 
not know him who hestows it^ he deprives himself of the 
gift of duration to aU eternity. And therefore the Lord 
speaks thus of such unthankful persons, ' If you have not 
been faithful in that which is least, who will commit much 
to you V intimating thereby unto us that they who are un- 
thankful to him with respect to this short transitory life,, 
which is his gift, the effect of his bounty ^ shall be most 
justly deprived of length of days in the imrld to come.''^ No 
language can be more explicit than the foregoing. It ex- 
presseSy as definitely as language can, that man has no con- 
stitutional immort£$lityy and that unless ^born again' of 
^incorruptible seed, '^ — the 'word of God which hveth and 
abideth for ever,' be must without doubt perish everlast- 

The theory of Tertullian, who flourished in the third 
century, exhibits th^ extent to which speculative inquiry 
went in connection with the doctrine of immortality. Thi» 
celebrated Father put forth a new doctrine^ as much phy- 
siological as theological, in which he maintained that the 
human soul was propagated, hke the body, by ordinary but 
distinct generation, — the soul being begotten by the soul^ 
as the body by the body, of the parent. He tells that God 
made Adam^s soul ^ matricem omni^m^'^ — the fountain or 
source of all souls. His theory is known by the name 
Traducianism {per traducem). Dod well justly reasons that 
Tertullian's opinions concerning the soul " are inconsistent 
with its independence upon purer matter, though it might 
sundve the grosser organical body of our visible humanity. 
....If therefore," he argues,, '' it be preserved from actual 
mortality it must be by the like interposition of an extra- 
ordinary providence, as that by which our bodies them- 
selves are to be immortalized after the resurrection." 

In the following century the Traducianism of Tertullian 
was opposed by the doctrine that the soul had its creation 
immediately from God^ and was neither propagated by 
traduction, nor born together with the body^as Lactantiu« 
and others supposed. This new theory is denominated 
Creationism. The difficulties involved in these respective 
systems inclined many theologians, among whom was Au- 
gustine, to ignore the controversy altogether, and declare 
their opinion that human science found a limit in this direc- 
tion beyond which it was impossible to pass. The two 


theories were consequently tolerated as legitimate specula- 
tions, and although they necessarily involved the natural 
mortality of the soul, were not on this account pronounced 
heretical. " It is plain,'" writes Dodwell, ** that they did 
not ihen^ in the fifth century, believe this doctrine of the 
souVs natural mortality heretical, so long as there was no 
question made of its being actually immm'taV The strength 
and influence of both parties led to something like a mutual 
compromise, nevertheless the orthodox doctrine was that 
the soul is constitutionally immortal. Lactantius contend- 
ed that immortality was not the natural property of the soul, 
but the reward of virtue ; and in this opinion he was forti- 
fied by the testimony of the earlier Greek theologians, who 
aflSrm that the Hebrews did not believe in the constitutional 
immortahty of man, but considered it dependent upon a 
virtuous character. Nemesius, a Greek philosopher of the 
fourth century, and a convert to Christianity, afterwards 
made Bishop of Emesa, in Phoenicia, also testifies to the 
faith of the Hebrews : — " the Hebrews confessedly say that 
man was created from the first neither mortal nor immor- 
tal, but capable of either nature ; that should he incline to 
fleshly passions, he might incur the fate of the flesh ; but if 
he aspired after spiritual excellence, he should be esteemed 
worthy of immortahty." 

Origen differed both from Tertullian and the Creationists, 
and gave it as his opinion that human souls had a pre-ex- 
istence. By this theory he easily disposed of the objection 
that what had a beginning could not be inherently immor- 
tal. " Among the primitive Christians," says Dodwell, 
" this doctrine of Origen was taken for very singular, nor 
did the great authority of the man recommend it to many 
among them. They generally condemned it in Plato him- 
self They generally took it for a maxim in arguing, that 
whatever had a beginning could not be necessarily or natu- 
rally immortal. On this principle they owned none im- 
mortal but God himself, — no, not the angels." 

Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, informs us of a 
sect existing in the third century in Arabia who denied the 
natural immortahty of the soul. They appear to have been 
of sufficient importance to give occasion to " a considerable 
council, to take into consideration what at this period among 
professional theologians was pronounced a heresy. "These," 
writes Eusebius, " asserted that the human soul, as long ag 
the present state of the world existed; perished at death 


and died with the body, but that it would be raised again 
with the body at the time of the resurrection." Against 
the opinions of these primitive Arabians, the theological 
powers of Origen, the great champk)n of the nascent ortho- 
doxy, were enlisted, and who appears to have been success- 
ful in overturning their previous faith, and bringing them 
to the persuasion of the new Platonism, or philosophical 
Christianity, which w^as rapidly extending itself over the 
ancient Christendom. 

Some of the Fathers of this period, among whom were 
Cyprian, Arnobius, and Athanasius, considered the soul 
to be naturally mortal, and ascribed its immortality to the 
communication of the Divine Spirit. It must, however, be 
acknowledged that the doctrine of the Church, — the ortho- 
dox, and which was daily becoming the popular doctrine 
was, that the soul is immortal. Subtile disputes in theolo- 
gy were, in those earlier times, as in our own, mostly con- 
fined to professional theologians, the " laity" not concern- 
ing themselves with these disputes, grew in a less discrimi- 
nating and more dogmatic faith. The immortahty of the 
soul, in some sense or other, was the orthodox, if not the 
universal, belief 

In concluding our sketch of the state of the doctrine of 
immortality at the close of the fifth century, it is scarcely 
necessary to remind the reader of the very speculative 
character of the period comprised in this section. The 
doctrine of the immortality of the soul took its rise in mere 
philosophical conjecture; was debated as a question of hu- 
man science, and established upon this necessarily imper- 
fect basis. Its introduction into the earlier Christianity is 
attributable to the influence of the Greek and Latin Fa- 
thers, Gieseler, in his Compendium of Ecclesiastical His- 
tory, acknowledges this influence in the d(>ctrinal theology 
of this period. " A speculative treatment of Christian doc- 
trine was," he says, " generally indispensable, if Christiani- 
ty should be accessible to the philosophical culture of the 
times, and was rendered unavoidable by the measures of 
the Gnostics. It could only proceed from Platonism, which 
of all philosophical systems stood the nearest to Christiani- 
ty. While many Platonic philosophers were brought over 
to Christianity by this internal relation, they received the 
latter as the most perfect philosophy, and retained, with 
their philosophical mantle, their philosophical turn of mind 
glsQi Tbej^ iet out with this principle * * that the truth 


taught by Plato was derived from Moses and the prophets. 
The arbitrary mode of interpretation then current furnish- 
-ed them with the means of proving their views, even from 
numerous passages of the Old Testament, which they could 
use, indeed, only in the Septuagint version. Thus, then, 
they overvalued even the actual agreement of Plato with 
•Christianity, and believed tliat they found many a Platonic 
idea in the latter, which in reality they themselves had first 
introduced into it." 


The impulse given to the speculative spirit by the intro- 
duction into Christianity of the philosophic element of Pla- 
tonism, in the second century, was by no means restrained 
during the period of which we are writing. Indeed, it is 
notorious that, from the time of this admixture of human 
and Divine science to the present hour, the doctrine of hu- 
man immortality has been built up on a ratiocinative and 
logical basis merely, and the Bible has been very coolly ig- 
nored as if it had no deliverance to make on the matter.— 
As we have already seen, the doctrine of the soul's immor- 
tality had become the orthodox and popular faith of the 
Church, but the doctors still disagreed on the question. 
They who held the dualistic theory, or a twofold division of 
man into body aiid soul, affirmed the biX)ad proposition that 
the soul was an independent and immortal substance. The 
advocates of the threefold division into body, soul, and 
spirit, denied the immortality of the soul, as did the earlier 
Greek theologians, and maintained that the soul becomes 
immortalized by its union with the spirit. Nicholas, of 
Methone, was the champion of this philosophical doctrine 
in the Greek Church. Ullmann, quoted by Hagenbach, 
thus reports him, " It is not every soul that neither perishes 
nor dies, but only the rational, truly spiritual, and divine 
soul, which is made perfect through virtue, by participation 
in the grace of God. For the souls of irrational beings, 
and still more of plants, may perish with the things which 
they inhabit, because they cannot be separated from the 
bodies which are composed, and may be dissolved into their 
elements," Elsewhere he says, ^^ When any created being 
is eternal, it is not so hy itself, nor in itself, nor for itself, 
but by the goodness of God ; for all that is made and 


created has a beginning, and retains its existence, only thro' 
the goodness of the Creator." In tho Western Churches 
the doctrine of the soul's intrinsic immortality was taught 
as a theological truth ; but the chief leaders of the scholas- 
tic sects, Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, were at issue 
on the question whether the doctrine was capable of being 
satisfactorily proved by the independent reason. Aquinas 
had drawn a distinction between the sensitive soul (anhna 
sensitiva) and ih^ rational ^ou\ (anima inteUectiva\ which 
enabled him to ascribe immortality to the latter, or rational 
part of man's nature only. '' The rational principle {intel- 
lectivum principitim) w^hich," he says, " we call the human 
soul, is incorruptible." The mode of proof which is adopt- 
ed is that which has been often used since, and is with some 
an argument still. " The human reason," he argued, " con- 
ceives itself absolute and adequate to all time. Henco 
whatever has reason has naturally a desire to live always. 
But a natural desire cannot be without its object, there- 
fore every rational substance {intellectvalis substantia) is in- 
corruptible or immortal." The validity of this mode of 
proof was not so apparent as to command universal assent. 
Scotus refused to accept it, and replied that the " immor- 
tality of the soul cannot be logically proved." The Scho- 
lastics, of the AristoteUan school, generally denied any in- 
herent immortality in man. Aristotle himself said that im- 
mortality was not inherent in the constitution of man, but 
was communicated {thusathen). But the Platonists labor- 
ed hard, at the close of this period, to estabhsh their favo- 
rite dogma of the soul's immortality. All their philoso- 
phical strength was brought to bear against the Aristotelian 
theory, in w^hich they were most effectively aided by the 
Pope, w^ho came in with his baton of infallibility, and at 
once decided the controversy by the dictum of spiritual 
authority. A Council of the Lateran, held A. D. 1513^ 
under Pope Leo X., pronounced the proper immortality of 
the soul an article of Christian faith, and discarded the dis- 
tinction between theological and philosophical truths as un- 
tenable. The following is a translation of the Canon which 
was enacted at this Council, as published by Caranza : — 

** Whereas, in those our days, some have dared to assert concerning the nature 
of the reasonable soul, that it is mortal, and one or the same in all men; 
dnd some, rashly philosophizing, declare this to ba true, at least according 
to philosophy. We. with the approbation of the sacred Council, do condemn 
and reprobate all those who assert that the intellectual soul is mortal, oj 


one and the Fame in all men, and those who call these things in question : 
seeing that the soul is not only truly, and of itself, and essentially the form 
of the human body, as is expressed in the Canon of Pope Clranent the Fifth, 
published in the General Council of Vienna, but likewise immortal, and, 
according to the number of bodies into which it is infused, is singularly 
multipliable, multiplied, ai^d to be multiplied. * * And seeing that truth 
never contradicts truth, we determine every assertion, which is contrary to 
revealed faith, to be false ; and we strictly inhibit all from dogmatizing 
otherwise, and we decree that all who adhere to the like erroneous asser- 
tions shall be shunned and punished as heretics." 

However, neither Popes nor Councils can lay an effective 
embargo on thought. Men, endowed with mental indepen- 
dence, cannot be brought to acquiesce in the mere authori- 
tative decisions of their fellow men, though wearing the 
triple mitre of spiritual absolutism. And this Council, Lu- 
ther says, was of so little authority as to be laughed at and 
despised by the Eomanists themselves. The most notable 
philosopher of Italy, in Leo's time, was Pietro Pomponazzo. 
This distinguished man took upon himself to maintain that 
the soul is absolutely mortal. Extracts from Papal letters 
by Contelori, show that Pietro was immediately and per- 
emptorily assailed on the opinion which he had avowed. — 
" Pietro, of Mantua," it is there said, " has asserted that, 
according to the principles of philosophy, and the opinion 
of Aristotle, the rational soul is, or appears to be mortal, 
contrary to the determination of the Lateran Council. The 
Pope commands that the said Pietro retract, otherwise that 
he be proceeded against." The Pontificate of Leo w^as an 
epoch in the history of the doctrine of the soul's immortali- 
ty. It was then that the successful effort was made to 
establish and give permanence to this doctrine ; but it was 
made by a usurper of the right of private judgment, and 
accomplished by an act of sacerdotal despotism. The ad- 
vocates of the doctrine of the soul's immortality need to be 
reminded of this suspicious passage in its historic progress. 
The seal of authority was affixed to it by a Eoman Pon- 
tiff, in the dawm of the sixteenth century, — a man, the wor- 
thy counterpart of England's Charles II., — fond of fashion 
and field sports, and mixing up in all the dissipated ex- 
cesses of the sacred metropolis. Such was his extrava- 
gance, that '* the charge has been laid at his door," says 
Kanke, " that he ran through the wealth of three Pontifi- 
cates, — that of his predecessor, from whom he inherited a 
considerable treasure ; his own, and that of his successor, 
to whom he be(j[ueathed a mass of debt." " It certainly 


cannot be denied," says the same historian, " th^t his life 
did not correspond to that befitting the supremo head of 
the Church." It was during the Pontificate of I.eo the 
Tenth that Luther visited Rome, and where the hcen- 
tiousness of the Papal court and clergy so astonished and 
disgusted him, that from that time his reverence for the 
Pope was completely and for ever destroyed. What must 
have been the corrupt influence of this Papal oracle of or- 
thodoxy, when in Rome it was a characteristic of good 
society to dispute the fundamental elements of Christianity I 
" One passes no longer," says P. Ant. Bandino, " for an 
accomplished man, unless he entertain some heterodox 
notions of Christianity." " At Court," proceeds Ranke, 
" they spoke of the institutions of the Catholic Church, of 
passages in the holy scriptures, only in a tone of jesting ; 
the mysteries of faith were held in derision." Such was 
Pope Leo the Tenth, and such the circle of sanctified 
society of which he was the animating centre ! Behold, 
ye asserters of your ow^n inherent immortality, the worthy 
"• nursing-father" of your faith ! — the hero of a hey-day 
heterodoxy ! — the jolly jester with the solemn sanctities of 
scripture ! — the mocker of the sacred mysteries ! Worthy 
patron of a Pagan progeny ! Let it be registered as the 
genuine genealogy of a fundamental doctrine of modern 
British Christendom, that the Pagan Plato was its father, 
and the profligate Pope Leo its foster-father. Born and 
bred by the Pagan philosophy and the protege of Popery, 
this notion of the souPs immortality has become a pet 
dogma of Popular Protestantism, which, with a strange 
forgetfulness of its low lineage, openly declares it to be 
the honorable ofispring of a true orthodoxy ! 


Papal influence had been declining for some time 
previous to the Reformation ; but by the dawn of the 
sixteenth century, it reached the nadir of its popularity. 
The character of Leo X., and the condition of his Court, 
as we have already seen, were anything but adapted to 
inspire respect for the triple crown. As the symbol of a 
spiritual dominion, it was very generally despised, and 
only a suitable opportunity was wanted to give unmis- 
takable expression to the reactionary feeling which exten- 
sively pervaded this age. Luther afforded this opportunity ; 


and by his manly though perilous course, delivered his 
own and subsequent generations from the powerful spell 
of Papal absolutism. The great German Heformer as- 
sumed an unwonted position in the giant presence of 
Papal infallibility. The old orthodox obsequiousness was 
spurned by the strong individuality and godly sincerity of 
his spirit. He spoke disdainfully of the decrees of Popes, 
after he discovered the deference due to the Word of God. 
The decrees of Pope Leo, for the reasons before assigned, 
he had a special contempt for. He thus ironically res- 
ponded to the decree of the Council of the Lateran held 
during the Pontificate of this Pope : — " I permit the Pope 
to make articles of faith for himself and his faithful, — such 
as the soul is the substantial form of the human body, — 
the soul is immortal^ — with all those monstrous opinions 
to be found in the Eoman dunghill of decretals \ that such 
as his faith is, such may be his gospel, such his disciples, 
and such his Church, that the mouth may have meat suit- 
able for it, and the dish a cover worthy of it." The belief 
of Luther is plainly expressed in these words, on the doc- 
trine of the soul's immortality ; it is evident that he refused 
to acknowledge this doctrine. The philosophy of Luther 
led him to conceive of the human soul as a distinct, but 
not an immortal, subsistence. The soul, he imagined, was 
separated from the body in death ; but he did not believe 
in its continued consciousness between death and resurrec- 
tion. He embraced and taught the doctrine of the sleep 
of the soul^ and continued in that belief to the close of 
his life. 

The prominence given by Luther to the doctrines of 
the non-immortahty of the soul, and its unconsciousness in 
death, induced Sir Thomas More to publish a work in 
reply, objecting to the views advocated by the Beformer. 
This reply of More's called another distinguished witness 
into the arena of controversy, — William Tyndale, the trans- 
lator : — '' In putting departed souls in heaven, hell, and 
purgatory," says Tyndale, '* you destroy the arguments 
wherewith Christ and Paul prove the resurrection. What 
God doth with them, that shall we know when we come 
to them. The true faith putteth the resurrection^ which 
we be warned to look for every hour. The heathen philo- 
sophers denying that^ did put that the souls did ever live. 
And the Pope joineth the spiritual doctrine of Christ, and 
the fleshly doctrine of philosophers together, — things so 


contrary that they cannot agree .... And because the 
fleshly-minded Pope consenteth unto heathen doctrine, 

therefore he corrupteth the scriptures to establish it 

If the souls be in heaven, tell me why they be not in as 
good case as the angels be ? And then what cause is 
there of the resurrection ?" 

Sir Thomas More asked, — " What shall he care, how 
long he live in sin that believeth Luther, that he shall after 
this life feel neither good nor evil in body nor soul, until 
the day of doom ?" To which Tyndale rephed, — " Christ 
and his Apostles taught no other, but warned to look for 
Christ's coming again every hour : ivhich coming again^ 
because ye believe will never be^ therefore have ye feigned 
that other merchandize?^ 

The above quotations prove that the present popular 
doctrines of the immortality of the soul, and a state of 
conscious life between death and the resurrection, were 
not doctrines held by Luther and the first Reformers. 
Luther calls them " monstrous opinions," and Tyndale 
declares that they were " heathen" and " fleshly doc- 
trines," and subversive of the scripture doctrines of 
Christ's second coming, and the resurrection from the 

Calvin now entered the arena, by the publication of a 
tractate entitled " Psychopannychia," a word of Greek 
derivation, intended to express the idea that the soul is 
awake in a state of consciousness through the whole night 
of death. " As to the book itself," writes an anonymous 
reviewer in the year 1772, " it is hot, furious, and abusive. 
The Hypnologists [sleep- preachers] as he [Calvin] calls 
them, are babblers, madmen, dreamers, drunkards, &c. 
Happily for them, his arguments are as feeble and sophis- 
tical as they themselves could wish." From Calvin's time, 
the doctrine of the soul's immortality, and its dependent 
dogmas, have gradually found their way into the several 
Protestant confessions ; and to this hour, these heathen 
heresies are accepted by the Romish, and all the Reformed 
Churches, as Christian verities. 

In the year 1706, Henry Dodwell, a Clergyman of cele- 
brity, espoused the doctrine of the mortality of the soul, 
and so revived the controversy. He associated, however, 
wuth his subject, some singular notions, the nature of 
which will be best perceived by the following copy of the 
title page of bis book : 


*^ An Epistolary Discourse, proving from the Scriptures, 
and the First Fathers, that the Soul is a Principle Natu- 
rally Mortal ; but Immortalized actually by the pleasure 
of God to Punishment, or to Keward, by its Union with 
the Divine Baptismal Spirit. Wherein is Proved that 
none have the power of giving this Divine Immortalizing 
Spirit, since the Apostles, but only the Bishops." [!!] 

This book called out several antagonists ; and the 
" learned Dodwell," as he was respectfully called, had the 
satisfaction of seeing this question of the soul's immortality 
again very widely agitated, and warmly debated. 

The controversy throughout has, as we have seen, been 
too much mixed up with philosophical and ecclesiastical 
traditions. The Reformers spoke of the sleep of the soul^ 
implying the old Platonic idea, that the soul is a distinct 
subsistence^ — and, indeed, that it is the essential human 
being in a state of torpor, which they called its " sleep," 
or " rest." 

Dodwell reasons like a clerical believer in baptismal 
regeneration, diifering from the modern Tractarian school 
in this respect, — that his regeneration was physical ^ where- 
as theirs is spiritual only. It has remained to our own 
times, to see the doctrine put in its proper hght, although 
it is still but very imperfectly apprehended by some ad- 
vocates, as well as opponents. The true statement of the 
doctrine, we apprehend, does not concern the soul or spirit, 
— but MAN. AVe should not ask whether the soul is mortal 
or immortal ; but whether man is one or the other. The 
scripture teaches nothing about the soul as a subsistence 
distinct from the body. Man is sometimes called ^6^5^, 
and sometimes soul, — *' All Jlesh^'' " Man became a living 
soul^'' &c. 

Bishop Law, the author of the '' Call to the Uncon- 
verted," in an " Appendix" to his " Considerations on the 
Theory of Religion," published in 1755, shook to its foun- 
dations the popular doctrine of a conscious intermediate 
state. Dr. Warburton also laid himself open to the sus- 
picion of heterodoxy on this subject, in his third edition of 
the '' Divine Legation of Moses," published in 1752. In 
his fourth edition of that work, he altered his phraseology, 
which had given occasion to the suspicion, not, however, 
without incurring the charge of trimming to popular 

Many eminent bibhcal scholars, since Law's time, have 


turned their attention to this controversy. In the city of 
Norwich it was mooted by the labors of Mr. Bourne, and 
also by Mr. John Marsom, who, in addition to the publica- 
tion of two small volumes, which have passed through two 
editions, advocated his opinions in the Monthly Repository. 
The controversy has passed through what we may call its 
philosophical period, and is now, by most thinking and 
well-read persons, acknowledged to be a Bible question. 
In this all but universal admission we rejoice, as tending 
to popularize a subject so necessary to be understood by 
all, whether learned or unlearned. We are thankful that 
the advanced intelligence of our own times has seen 
through the fallacy of the '' Argument from Reason ;" and 
that such elaborate sophisms as Mr. Samuel Drew's " Es- 
say" are universally voted to the shelf, as now altogether 
beside the question, which, at one time, they were thought 
so triumphantly to elucidate, and even to settle. 

The theological writings of the learned Dr. Whately, 
Archbishop of Dublin, have exercised considerable intiu- 
ence in reviving the controversy in our ow^n times. The 
scholastic popularity, as well as ecclesiastical eminence of 
this dignitary of the English Church, have secured for his 
writings an amount of attention and respect beyond those 
of his contemporaries. His work, entitled '' A View of 
the Scripture Revelations concerning a Future State," 
has been extensively read by professional theologians ; 
and since the pubhcation of this book, many others have 
issued from the press, from the pens of both Clergymen and 
Nonconformist Ministers. The Rev. Reginald Courtenay, 
Rector of Thornton Watless, issued, in the year 1843, a 
goodly octavo volume, under the title of '* The Future 
States," advocating the unpopular side of the question, 
and which he dedicated to Archbishop Whately. This 
was followed, in the ensuing year, by a httle w^ork called 
" Notes of Lectures," afterwards considerably amplified in a 
clever and closely reasoned book, published in 1846, by H. 
H. Dohney, a Baptist Minister, at Maidstone, entitled, 
" The Scrfpture Doctrine of Future Punishment." Almost 
simultaneously with this work of Mr. Dobney's, appeared 
a volume from the pen of Mr. Edw^ard White, a Congre- 
gational Minister, in Hereford. Mr. White's book, " Life 
in Christ," contains much valuable matter, in defence of 
the non-immortality of man, and the final destruction of 
the wicked. Since these works, others have issued from 


the press. Three Nonconformist Ministers, one in Edin- 
burgh, another in Bristol, and the third in Plymouth, have, 
in addition to their public testimony as preachers, put on 
record their convictions in pamphlets and larger works. 
Mr. W Glen MoncriefF, a Congregational Minister iu 
Edinburgh, has pubhshed his " Dialogues on Future 
Punishment," a work on '' Soul," and is about to issue 
a companion to the foregoing, to be entitled " Spirit." 
Besides these, Mr. MoncriefF has edited a pamphlet by 
Mr. Grew, of Philadelphia, U. S., called the " Intermediate 
State." In the spring of 1849, Mr. J. Panton Ham, Con- 
gregational Minister, of Bristol, issued a volume of lectures 
on " Life and Death ; or the Theology of the Bible in 
relation to Human Immortality." The first edition of 
this book sold in the first year of its publication ; and a 
second, somewhat enlarged, was sent forth in the spring of 
1851. As a supplement to this work, he issued another, 
entitled " The Generations Gathered and Gathering ; or 
the Scripture Doctrine concerning Man in Death." Both 
these books have since been repubhshed in New- York, 
United States. 

A distinguished writer against the popular doctrine of 
inherent natural immortality, has appeared in the person 
of the Regius Professor of Modern History, at Cambridge, 
the Right Hon. Sir James Stephen. The views of this 
writer are very candidly expressed in " The Epilogue" 
to his recently published " Essays in Ecclesiastical Bio- 
graphy," a series of Papers originally contributed to the 
Edinburgh Review. An attempt was made, in the Uni- 
versity of which Sir James Stephen is a member and 
Professor, to affix the stigma of heresy on him for the 
publication of these opinions ; the attempt, however, failed. 
The following report appeared in the Times newspaper, of 
Thursday, Oct. 30, 1851. " Cambridge. Congregation. — 
The Professor of Modern History. — It was proposed by 
the Rev. Lucius Arthur, M.A., of Trinity College, to offer 
the following grace to the Senate, in connexion with the 
works of Sir James Stephen : ' Cum falsa doctrina in reli- 
gione omnino cavenda sit : Placeat vobis ut fiat inquisitio 
in opiniones a Professore Historige recentiores vulgatas.' 
Essays in Eccles. Biography ; the Epilogue. The grace 
was, however, rejected in the caput." AH honor to the 
Senate for resisting this piece of clerical impertinence and 
tyranny I 


It is due to the untiring activity of Mr. George Storrs, 
of New- York, that we should make honorable mention of 
him, in connection w'ith these controversies. Mr. Storrs is 
the editor of a monthly periodical, called the '' Bible 
Examiner," and has written and preached very extensively 
on his side of the Atlantic. He has been testifying to 
these truths for the past twelve years, and been the means 
of raising up many advocates of these Gospel principles in 
different parts of the States. 

Once more the controversy is revived, both in Great 
Britain and America, and has been publicly acknowledged 
by several writers, who have labored to fortify the popular 
faith. The Congregational I^ecture of the late Dr. Winter 
Hamilton, entitled " The Eevealed Doctrine of Eewards 
and Punishments," and " Athanasia ; or Four Books on 
Immortality," by the Eev. J. Howard Hinton, A.M., are 
the principal responses on the " orthodox" side, in Great 
Britain. Some writers and preachers, misapprehending 
the position of those who advocate the natural mortality of 
man, and that immortality is a gift of God, communicated 
to believers only through Christ, have helped, by their 
unreflecting and angry impatience, to foment much bitter 
feeling, and to stir up a blind and uncharitable opposition. 
False and opprobrious epithets have been freely applied to 
the advocates of the so-called " new doctrine," — a mode of 
warfare which is happily much less harmful than it used to 
be. It is now generally regarded as the evidence of a 
weak cause, or personal inability to defend a cause, when 
recourse is had to opprobrious name-calHng, and offensive 
personalities. Bullying is not a legitimate weapon in the 
battle of truth, and can never be acceptable except to the 
bantling and the bigot. It is to be earnestly hoped, that 
these great fundamental inquiries will be prosecuted in the 
present age, in that spirit of seriousness and sanctity be- 
coming their nature and importance. We may contend 
earnestly for the faith, without discourtesy and unchari- 
tableness towards those who differ from us ; and a contest 
courteously carried on, is most likely to result in a mutual 
agreement, and that in the truth. 

" A word, in conclusion, on the importance of the doctrinal 
inquiries which have been the subjects of this historical 
sketch. Some, convinced of the unscriptural character of 
the popular or ^' orthodox" doctrine of human immortahty, 
and of the duty of laboring to disabuse the pubHc mind of 


this false doctrine, yet disagree with those who inculcate 
the implied truth of an internaediate state of unconscious- 
ness, as the condition of man between death and resurrec- 

The relation of this doctrine to the Christian doctrines 
of resurrection, and the pre-millennial advent of Christ, is 
obvious. It adds a new emphasis to the cry, " Come, Lord 
Jesus !" and gives a prominence, unknown to the popular 
theology, to the official dignity of Christ, as the " Resur- 
rection and the Life." Besides the aspect of this doctrine 
of unconsciousness in death to other related truths revealed 
in the Scriptures, its aspect towards certain errors is no 
less obvious and important. Deprive Popery of these two 
false dogmas, — the immortality of the soul, and its separate 
and conscious state in death, — and you deprive that mon- 
ster system of spiritual wickedness of its prestige, and 
terrible influence. Protestantism is weak in the presence 
of this ancient foe, because, to a considerable extent, it 
stands on a common doctrinal platform. It grants to 
Popery the very foundations of its anti-scriptural and 
mischievous dogmas 

Every behever of these important truths, should add 
the weight of his personal testimony, and cast in all his 
personal influence, to give prominence and success to such 
a controversy. There are laborers now in the high places 
of the field, bearing, almost single-handed and alone, the 
burden and heat of the day, — whose voice unites with the 
voice of God, of Christ, and of the truth, urging their fel- 
low-behevers to come openly to their help, and the help of 
the Lord, against the mighty. Let not this united appeal 
be in vain. The proof of faith is faithfulness. He that 
has convictions, if he have also a conscience, will confess. 
The claims are complete, which this divine cause makes 
on Christian candor and self-denial. We trust they will 
be reverently heeded, that this work of reform may be 
carried on to its final and triumphant consummation. 


4w7t— examination of, 267 ; does 
not mean ** for ever," 268. 

Ainnios — examination of, 272- 
282 ; limited meaning of, 
272 ; result of the exami- 
nation of, 274 ; texts re- 
lating to future punish- 
ment containing it, 278 

il«3e5to— Eusebius' use of it, 223 ; 
no proof of endless tor- 
ment, 221-224. 

Annihilate— 2Z^. 

Bothmless Pit— ISO. 

Christ — truly died, 97 ; his soul 
died, 69, 74. 

/)ea<i— unconsciousness of, 113. 

Death — the penalty of the law, 
256 ; figurative meaning 
of the term seldom admis- 
sible, 258. 

^Tw— meaning of, 277. 

Endless Misery — not taught in 
the Bible, 275 ; texts used 
to sustain it, 276. 

Everlastings — many have passed 
away, 269. 

Eternities — two limited ones, 

Forever— -thQ end of, 267. 

Fry's Translation of Job 10 : 8- 
12 verses, 19. 

Gehenna — meaning of, 215 ; his- 
tory of, 216 ; implies de- 
struction, 217 ; locality 
of, 218 ; meaning of in 
James 3 : 6 verse, 219 ; 
wholly consumes, 221- 


Ghosts— of men, none, 92. 

HarwoocVs Translation of Mat. 
10 : 28 verse, 225. 

Ha^fe5— 207-216; Dr. Campbell's 
opinion of, 208 : gates of, 

Heaven — its location, 148, 207 ; 

" third," 154. 
Heavens — the third, 148. 
-fleZZ— Pagan, 171 ; Mahometan, 
174 ; Roman Catholic, 
174 ; Protestant, 175 ; of 
the Bible, 177 ; meaning 
of, 177 ; no torment in, 
199 ; conclusion respect- 
ing, 231. 
Historical Inquiry — into the ori- 
gin of the doctrine of in- 
herent immortality, 283- 
Immortal — the soul not, 49 ; the 
spirit not, 108: the mind 
not, 113. 
Immortality — its source, 131 ; pe- 
culiar to the rii'hteous, 

Mortal — names of man indicate 
mortality, 54. 

Nepkesh — the soul, 31 j is properly 
rendered " person," 42 j 
corresponds with psuche^ 
11, 12 ; Parkhurst's re- 
marks on, 15. See Spirit, 

iVe5??ig— meaning of, 14, 15. 

New Jerusalem — where, 148. 

Life — is the great promise, 257 ; 
terms used to convey the 
promise of, 259 ; figurative 
meaning of the term sel- 
dom admissible, 258. 

Lake of Fire, 22^. 

Lower parts of the Earth, 229. 

Oiilom — meaning of, 262 ; limit- 
ed, 264. 

Paradise — location of, 148. 

Pauls desire to depart — 136. 

Penalty — of the law, 61. 

Pneuma — 84. See Spirit. 



Psuche-^vise of the term, 87-39 j 


Penitent Thi€f-^1S9. 

Resurrection— the only hope, 124. 

i?waA~84 ; corresponds witli 
Pneumaj 12. See Spirit. 

Rich Man and Lazarus-'-214i, 

Scriptures— csLUtion necessary in 
the interpretation of, 157 ; 
corruption of, 10 ; the 
original the only stand* 
ard, 6 ; translation defec- 
tive/i6-; Vulgate, the basis 
of the common version, 
9 ; translators unfaithful, 
8, 71, 122 ; a new transla- 
tion needed, 8. 

Stepken*s case considered — 98. 

Sheal'-'lSb. See Hades. 

Sflul — meaning of, 11 ; number 
of times it occurs, 14, 16 ; 
less than is assumed, 16 ; 
not a ghost, 17, 21 ; not a 
part of God, 18 ; is of the 
dust, 19 ; is born, 20, 21 ; 
not a spirit, 21 ; ani- 
mal nature of, 22 ; not a 
living thing apart from 
the body, 26 ; not the 
mind, 27 ; is a creature, 
animal, or person, 31, 42 ; 
eats and drinks, 40 ; can 
be killed, 43; is self, 44; 
term often rendered heart 
and mind, 45 ; is the man, 
46 ; faints, 53 ; can be cut 
off, 58 ; smitten with a 
sword, 59 ; dies, 61 ; un- 
conscious of itself, 61 ; 
identical with the person, 
66 J enters the grave, 67 ; 

not conscious in deatli, 
113 ; does not snrvive m 
death, 113, 121. There arc 
dead souls, 12, 47, 75 ; 
beasts are souls, 31. 

Spirit — meaning of the term, 12 : 
what is it 1 84 ; means air. 
wind, breath, 87, 8? ; 
breath identical ,90 ; mind, 
temper, 101-106 ; the per- 
son, 106 ; not susceptible 
of life, 108 ; not mortal 
nor immortal, 108; cut 
otf, loa 

Strictures'^on Dr. Adam Clarke, 
212 ; on Professor Stuart, 
199, 262, 276. 

Tophet — meaning of the terra, 
216 ; same aa Gehenna, 


Transjiguration-^l 62. 

Texts J llustrated—M3it 10: 28, 
p. 170; 1 Cor. 15: 44, pp. 
25, 130; Phil. 1: 21, p 
136 ; Ps. 16 : 10, p. 205 : 
Matt. 25 • 46, pp. 279-281' 
and many others, too nu- 
merous to insert in the 

Wicked — final destiny of, 233; 
must perish, 235; be des- 
troyed, 239 ; be annihi- 
lated, 239 ; destruction 
come on, 171, 241 ; be 
devoured, 243 ; be con 
sumed, 244 ; burned with 
fire, 246 J cease to exist 


Postage can be pre paid, or paid on delivery , as the purchaser may 
choose. Works not weighing: over 3 oz. can be sent to any part of the 
United States for one cent, if pre-paid, or two cents if paid on delivery. 
Books bounds or unbound, one cent per oz. under 3000 miles : one-half 
cent to be added if not pre-paid. Tracts half cent per oz. if sent in 
packages of not less than eig/if, oiinces^ otherwise subject'to same postage 
as three oz. pamphlets, each. 

1. ScRiPTuwE Doctrine of Future Punishment, by H. H. Dobney," 
Baptist minister ; an argument in two parts. This is a work of great 
power, showing the Righteous ordy will live Forever^ 286 pages. Price 
60 cts. bound. Weight 18 oz. In paper covers 37 1-2 cts : wgt. 9 oz> 

2. " DoBNKY Abridged." — Or, the Second Part of the Scripture Doc- 
trine of Future Punishment, in an edition by itself. It contains all 
that is really essential in the controversy, to enable the reader to decide 
whether eiyikss torture^ or destruction of being, is the true teaching of 
Scripture. We put it at the extremely low price of 25 cents, in paper 
covers. Weight 6 oz. 

3. ** The Unity of Man, or Life and Death Realities.— A Reply 
to Rev. Luther Lee, by Anthropos." This is a thorough refutation of 
Mr. Lee's position of the natural immortality of man. Price 16 cents. 
Weight 3 oz. 

4. 'Six Skrmons, by Geo. Storrs. An inquiry. Are the Wicked Im- 
rtwrtal 7 ' To which is added a dissertation on the "State of the Dead ;" 
QXiH prefixed Arclibishop Whately's remarks on the "The Second 
DeathJ' Price 15 cents. -^Weight 3 oz. 

6. *' Storrs' Misckllany " — It contains the foregoing Nos. 4 and 5, 
with a variety of other matter, bound. Price 50 cents.^ Wgt. 9 oz» 

6. " Thk Generations Gathkrkd and Gathering ; or, The Scripture 
Doctrine of Man in Death. By J. Pan ton Ham," Congregational minis- 
ter, England. Price 10 cents. Weight 2 oz. 

7. '"Life and Death ; or. The Theology of the Bible in Relation to 
Huniaii Inimorioliiy. Three Lectures, by J. Panton Ham." A most 
interesting work in connection with his other, above named. Price 
and weight same as the other. 

8. " Bible vs Tradition." — Price 75 cts. Weight about 16 oz. 
On the foregoing works one- third discount will be made, for cash, 

to wholesale purchasers. 

9. "The Bible Examiner," super royal octavo, sixteen pages, is 
published nionlMy, at one dollar for twelve numbers. Payrtient always 
in advance, li^ object \s an examination of the Scriptures — in their 
prophetic revelations, doctrinal instructions, and practical use, but 
especially to illustate and defend the great gospel truth — *' No ImmoV' 
tality, nor Endless Life, except through Jesus Christ alone." 

10. Bible Examiner for '50 and '51, bound in one vol. Price SI. 50. 
Also in sheets for '49, '50, and '51. Price 50 cents for each year: and 
for '52, price 75 cents. 

11. *' Bible Examiner, Extra." — New Edition. It contains Bishop 
Whately's remarks on " Second Death" — " Endless Misery," by Bishop 
Newton — Our "Six Sermons," &c., 16 pages, quarto, and sold at the 
extreme low price of S2.50per 100, or 5 cts. single copy. Wgt. 2 oz. 

A variety of T racts also can be had of us on the foregoing topics. — 
All orders and communications must be addressed, 

GEO. STORRS, New- York. 







This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
on the date to which renewed. 




JUN 91986 

dscuuTioN DEn; 



General Library 

University of California 



YB 28231 

'■'BffARY . u,c.